Seven Democrats are facing criticism after voting to advance funding for ICE ahead of the 2026 elections.

Seven House Democrats voted in favor of a $64.4 billion bill to advance a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spending measure that includes about $10 billion for ICE. The votes came during a markup of the DHS appropriations bill, with Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky casting the lone Republican vote against the funding, which passed 220-207 and will fund ICE and FEMA through September 30.

The seven Democrats who voted alongside the majority of Republicans to push forward the bill are Representatives

  • Tom Suozzi (New York),
  • Henry Cuellar (Texas),
  • Don Davis (North Carolina),
  • Laura Gillen (New York),
  • Jared Golden (Maine),
  • Vicente Gonzalez (Texas),
  • Marie Glusenkamp Perez (Washington).
  • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
    531·
    2 days ago

    Cuellar is a DINO who almost got primaried last election by an actual liberal dem — until Pelosi and her friends flew down to Texas to endorse him last minute for some bizarre reason. Then he got indicted for bribery and money laundering. Then Trump pardoned him. And yet something tells me Nancy still has no regrets.

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7·
      2 days ago

      Related

      “I don’t know why the president decided to do this, [but] I think the outcome was exactly the right outcome,” Jeffries said in an interview with CNN.

      The remarks are a stark contrast from Jeffries’s criticisms of the scores of other pardons Trump has offered — mostly to his political allies — throughout his second term. Jeffries, joined by most Democrats in his caucus, has bashed those reprieves as both an affront to the nation’s criminal justice system and more evidence that the Trump administration is the most “corrupt” in the country’s history.

      But in the case of Cuellar, the Democratic leader has taken a softer approach. And Wednesday, following Trump’s pardon, Jeffries questioned the legitimacy of the corruption charges against him.

      “Listen, the reality is [that] this indictment was very thin to begin with, in my view,” Jeffries told CNN. “The charges were eventually going to be dismissed — if not at the trial court level [then] by the Supreme Court, as they’ve repeatedly done in instances just like this.”

      https://archive.is/1Zsoa