The Senate approved a $70 billion immigration enforcement funding package on Friday, delivering a major legislative victory for President Donald Trump's administration while leaving unresolved a contentious dispute over a proposed compensation fund for Americans who claim they were unfairly targeted by the government.
The measure passed by a 52-47 vote, largely along party lines. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the lone Republican to oppose the legislation, while all Democrats present voted against it. Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado did not vote.
The bill provides funding for key immigration enforcement agencies through the remainder of President Trump's second term and comes as the administration continues to prioritize border security and immigration enforcement as central policy objectives.
The largest share of funding is directed toward frontline immigration agencies:
- $38.6 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
- $22.6 billion for U.S. Border Patrol
- $5 billion for the Department of Homeland Security
- Additional funding for related immigration enforcement operations
While the funding itself attracted significant attention, much of the Senate debate centered on a separate issue: the Trump administration's proposed $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund. The Justice Department announced the initiative earlier this month as a mechanism that could provide compensation and formal apologies to individuals who believe they were unfairly investigated or prosecuted by the federal government.
Several senators from both parties sought to add language that would permanently block the creation of the fund. Those efforts failed, allowing the bill to move forward without restrictions on the proposal.
The controversy intensified after critics warned that some January 6 defendants or Trump supporters could potentially seek compensation through the program. According to NBC News, eight Republican senators supported an amendment designed to prohibit payments to individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol attack. The amendment failed to secure the 60 votes required for passage.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune sought to downplay the dispute, arguing that the issue had effectively been resolved after comments from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
"I think what, what was talked about, and then ultimately done away with, is, in my view, it's a settled issue," Thune said.
Democrats strongly disagreed, arguing that Congress should have formally blocked the fund rather than relying on assurances from administration officials.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer criticized Republicans for refusing to prohibit the proposal outright.
"Republicans refused to permanently outlaw Trump's $2 billion slush fund, leaving taxpayers to rely on nothing more than a promise from Donald Trump's personal fixer," Schumer said. "That is not accountability. That is a permission slip."
The legislative battle is unfolding alongside a separate court fight. Last week, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema temporarily blocked the administration from establishing the fund while legal challenges proceed. The order prevents the government from formally creating the program and a hearing is scheduled for June 12 to determine whether the injunction should remain in place.
According to the Justice Department, the proposed compensation program would be open to applicants regardless of political affiliation. Officials said there would be "no partisan requirements" for participation and that any unused funds would return to the federal government after the program's scheduled expiration on Dec. 1, 2028.
