Sen. Ruben Gallego talks about debate over DHS funding as deadline approaches

WASHINGTON — A partial shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is set to begin tonight after lawmakers left the capital without a deal, injecting a fresh wave of uncertainty into federal operations and the nation's security apparatus. The impasse centers on a contentious debate over the conduct and future of U.S. immigration enforcement agencies, a flashpoint crystallized in a recent vote against a funding measure by lawmakers including Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona.

Speaking from the Munich Security Conference, Sen. Gallego defended his vote, arguing that a pause is necessary to address what he describes as a crisis of professionalism and accountability within key DHS agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). While the deadline's passing triggers a technical shutdown, Gallego suggested the immediate operational impact would be limited, providing a window for further negotiation.

"Everything is a big deal when you're dealing with uncertainty of funding," Gallego stated. "But the one thing that we can't do is to rush to fund a government entity such as ICE and Border Patrol that killed two Americans in 2 1/2 weeks. So we have to do this right."

The Shutdown Standoff

With the funding deadline now here, questions loom over the status of critical DHS components. The department is responsible for a wide array of national security functions, from airport screening to maritime safety and cybersecurity.

According to Gallego, the immediate effects of the missed deadline may be less dramatic than the term "shutdown" implies.

• Immediate Impact: Gallego noted that many essential agencies, including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Coast Guard, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), remain funded for several weeks. "Nothing right now," he said when asked what happens tonight. "They'll continue doing their work."
• Negotiation Window: The senator views this period not as a crisis but as an opportunity. "In the meantime, we're going to continue trying to find a solution," he added, emphasizing the need for a carefully considered approach rather than a rushed vote.

At the Core of the Dispute: Immigration Enforcement

The funding deadlock is less about dollar amounts and more about a profound disagreement over the direction and oversight of federal immigration policy. Gallego, who represents a border state, argues that his constituents' desire for border security is coupled with a demand for professional and humane enforcement—a standard he says is not being met.

He asserted that voters understand the "nuanced position" of wanting both security and accountability, and will support his stance.

• A Crisis of Professionalism: Gallego pointed to a pattern of "unprofessional" behavior from federal immigration agents. "That's not what they're seeing in Los Angeles. That's not what they saw in Minnesota," he said. "People are used to trained, professional law enforcement in their towns, and what they're seeing is quite the opposite."
• Political Calculation: The senator believes this position is tenable even in a border state heading into an election year. He argues that the public distinguishes between the principle of immigration enforcement and the controversial methods currently on display.

"Tear It Down": A Call for Radical Reform

Gallego clarified his previous calls to "tear down" ICE, distinguishing it from simply abolishing the agency. His critique targets what he sees as a systemic decay within the organization, which he attributes directly to the influence of White House senior advisor Stephen Miller.

"At the core, ICE is absolutely rotten right now," Gallego said bluntly. He outlined a series of deep-seated problems that he argues require a fundamental restructuring of the agency, not just minor reforms.

• Leadership and Mission Creep: Gallego claims Miller is "putting some of the worst elements into ICE" and that the agency is hiring undertrained personnel for a "very sensitive" mission that has expanded beyond its necessary scope.
• Erosion of Civil Liberties: He raised alarms about agents operating with powers that "most law enforcement has ever needed, such as being able to avoid warrants, being able to detain Americans."
• Mass Detention Infrastructure: The senator expressed grave concern over plans to "create about eight to 10 massive warehouses to house, you know, tens of thousands of humans." He argued that such a setup cannot be left in place after the Trump administration.
• The Alternative Vision: Gallego's goal is not the elimination of immigration enforcement but its transformation. "We're always going to have an immigration enforcement force," he stated. "But it has to be rightsized to the mission that we want...that respects human rights...That's professional immigration enforcement and border control, not the suppression that we're seeing in cities right now."

A State in the Spotlight: The Guthrie Kidnapping

The conversation also turned to a high-profile crisis in Gallego's home state of Arizona: the apparent kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie, mother of news anchor Savannah Guthrie. The case has shocked the Tucson community and drawn national attention, particularly after doorbell camera footage emerged showing an armed man on her porch.

Gallego confirmed he is engaged with the situation and focused on ensuring a robust federal response.

• Federal Involvement: "We're in touch with authorities," he said. "It is my goal to make sure that the federal government is doing everything it can...and using every leverage they can and every technology they can to make sure that she gets home safely."
• Inter-Agency Conflict: When asked about reports of a conflict between the FBI and local authorities over the investigation, Gallego stated he had no direct knowledge. "I don't, but I really hope..." he began, before trailing off.

What's Next

The partial shutdown of DHS officially begins, but the true deadline, by Gallego's account, is still weeks away. The immediate focus for markets and federal employees will be on how long the impasse lasts and whether negotiations can produce a compromise when Congress reconvenes.

This funding battle serves as a clear proxy for the larger, deeply divisive national conversation on immigration. The outcome will not only determine the operational capacity of DHS but will also signal the political appetite for the kind of sweeping reforms demanded by Gallego and other critics of the administration's hardline immigration agenda. For a senator from a key border state, the political stakes could not be higher.