President Donald Trump has rejected a potential compromise to end the shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, instead urging Republicans to hold out for passage of his sweeping election overhaul, the SAVE America Act.
Trump first outlined the strategy on social media before reiterating it during remarks in Memphis, calling on lawmakers to delay recess and prioritize the legislation. He framed voter ID requirements and proof of citizenship—central provisions of the bill—as essential to national security.
His approach effectively links two contentious measures: a DHS funding bill without immigration enforcement restrictions, and the SAVE America Act, both of which face strong Democratic opposition. The strategy aims to pressure Democrats into backing both proposals.
The plan was met with skepticism on Capitol Hill from both parties. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the proposal was unrealistic, while Republican Sen. Roger Marshall acknowledged the goal but questioned its feasibility.
Democrats strongly criticized the move. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the strategy “ridiculous” and accused Trump of prolonging the shutdown for political gain.
Legislative hurdles remain significant. Both the DHS funding bill and the SAVE America Act would require 60 votes in the Senate to pass, and neither currently has sufficient support.
The standoff has further complicated efforts to reopen DHS, even as negotiations had been underway. Officials note that communication between the White House and lawmakers had continued in recent days, including meetings involving border policy adviser Tom Homan.
Some Republicans have proposed an alternative path, suggesting Congress fund less controversial DHS components—such as airport security—while addressing immigration enforcement separately. Under that plan, funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement could be pursued through the budget reconciliation process, bypassing the need for Democratic support.
Trump’s insistence on tying DHS funding to his election legislation, however, appears to have hardened positions on both sides, raising the risk of a prolonged shutdown and continued disruption to federal operations, including airport security.
