The question of whether ICE can or cannot be reformed — and if so, just how far that reform should go — may be the most pressing topic in American politics right now.
Senate Democrats who backed a deal last week to end the government shutdown apparently believe that ICE, or U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, can be rehabilitated if the right reforms are implemented — and that a two-week window to negotiate those reforms is reasonable.
Senate Democrats who voted against the deal are a more complex mix: some think reform is possible but want to apply maximum pressure on Republicans immediately, while others believe ICE is fundamentally tainted and needs to be abolished altogether.
The Senate deal, which was supported by President Donald Trump, would fund the Department of Homeland Security for two more weeks while funding the rest of the government through the end of the fiscal year. It was driven by a bipartisan willingness to weigh reforming ICE, whose paramilitary tactics in Minnesota and elsewhere have generated widespread popular resistance and significant political backlash.
The same divisions are evident in the House, which is expected to vote Tuesday on the Senate’s funding package. Whatever the outcome, the House will engage in its own internal debates about whether and how to reform ICE. As in the Senate, some Democrats will likely support a two-week negotiation window while others reject it — either because they want to maximize their leverage, or because they consider any effort at reform a doomed attempt to save a rogue agency.
In Tuesday’s House vote, abolitionists can be expected to make common cause with at least some reformers, just as they did in the Senate last week. But when a final DHS funding proposal reaches the floor of both chambers, those same reformers and abolitionists will likely be casting opposing votes.
So where do the members of Massachusetts’ congressional delegation stand? Based on interviews with GBH News and past public statements, here’s what we know about the views of Massachusetts’ two senators and nine representatives.
Sen. Ed Markey: Voted “No” last week on the Senate funding package. A spokesperson tells GBH News that Markey “plans to vote no on any bill that funds DHS.” In a video recently posted to X, Markey said of the current budget impasse, “Right now, Democrats have the power to defund and abolish ICE. We should do it. This is about right and wrong, and the murder we are seeing on the streets is just plain wrong.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren: Also voted “No” last week on the Senate funding package. She said in a recent speech, “If it were up to me, Congress would completely overhaul ICE [and] strip the agency down to its studs.” After last week’s vote, Warren issued a statement identifying reforms she considers essential: “Not one penny more for ICE without stopping this violence … No more roving patrols. No more secret masked police. No more warrantless raids. Investigate and prosecute ICE crimes.”
Rep. Jake Auchincloss: In a recent Substack post titled “No paramilitary in America,” he called for “reforming and retraining ICE so that this instrument of fear is hammered back into an arm of the law.” He told GBH News he has three minimum requirements for voting to fund DHS: First, for the government to move immigration agents out of Minnesota and cooperate fully with investigations into Renee Good and Alex Pretti’s deaths. Second, he wants revamped use of force and due process standards that include banning masks and using body cameras. Third, he wants ICE redirected to the border and criminals deported “away from dragnet operations that sow fear in American cities.”
Democratic Whip Katherine Clark: Told National Public Radio Monday that “ICE needs to act like every other law enforcement agency.” Cited obtaining independent judicial warrants before raids, removing masks, wearing ID badges, “stop[ping] storming houses of worship, hospitals and schools,” and independent investigations into the killings of Good and Pretti as non-negotiable reforms.
Rep. Bill Keating: Told GBH News that “ICE cannot continue to operate in egregious violation of our constitution, due process, and rule of law.”
Rep. Stephen Lynch: Told GBH News that any reforms must come with “ironclad guarantees” they’ll be implemented due to a lack of trust between Democrats and the Trump Administration. He cites a “return to law,” and advocates the use of body cameras and name plates, a ban on masks, the removal of Kristi Noem as DHS secretary, and independent investigations into Good and Pretti’s deaths as preconditions for his support of additional DHS funding.
Rep. Jim McGovern: Has been calling for ICE’s abolition since 2018, when the first Trump Administration was separating families crossing the border. Prior to last week’s Senate vote, McGovern told GBH News that ICE is “irreparably damaged — there’s a culture of impunity that I don’t think can be fixed. I think you’ve got to start all over again.”
Rep. Seth Moulton: Told GBH News prior to the Senate vote that “ICE is beyond repair, so it should be abolished, but even more urgently, its criminals need to be prosecuted. 'Prosecute ICE’ should be the clarion call for Democrats today.” However, Moulton has also indicated a willingness to support expanded funding for ICE if specific reforms are implemented, including (among other things) banning the use of ICE field centers for overnight and multiday detention; banning the routine use of masks; improving congressional access to ICE detention facilities; and requiring regular, detailed public reporting on the agency’s conduct, including all cases in which U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents are stopped, questioned, or detained by ICE agents.
Rep. Richard Neal: Did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Rep. Ayanna Pressley: Has been calling for ICE’s abolition since her primary challenge to then-Rep. Mike Capuano in 2018. She said during a recent visit to Minnesota, “We need to abolish ICE and dismantle the systems of oppression that have gotten us to this point.” After returning from Minnesota, she told Politico that “ICE cannot be reformed any more than the KKK could.”
Rep. Lori Trahan: Said before the Senate vote that congressional Democrats “[M]ust oppose any further funding for the Department of Homeland Security until meaningful guardrails are put in place outlining how an immigration enforcement agency can be rebuilt with the trust of the American people. ICE does not have that trust today, and cannot continue as it currently exists without it.”
