{"id":35060,"date":"2026-05-22T00:02:32","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T00:02:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/?p=35060"},"modified":"2026-05-22T00:02:32","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T00:02:32","slug":"senate-gop-erupts-over-trump-doj-anti-weaponization-fund-punts-ice-border-patrol-funding","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/?p=35060","title":{"rendered":"Senate GOP erupts over Trump DOJ \u2018anti-weaponization\u2019 fund, punts ICE, Border Patrol funding"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Senate Republicans are pressing pause on their push to fund immigration enforcement after a tense, closed-door meeting.\u00a0<br \/>\nBut it\u2019s not over internal divisions. This time, the fury is directed toward the Trump administration and the surprise \u201canti-weaponization\u201d fund created by the Department of Justice (DOJ). It comes as Republicans were near the finish line for their $72 billion package to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol.\u00a0<br \/>\nFor now, Republicans are calling it a day and leaving Washington, D.C.\u00a0<br \/>\n\u201cWe will pick up where we left off,\u201d Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said.<br \/>\nREPUBLICANS RECOIL AS TRUMP\u2019S BILLION-DOLLAR DOJ \u2018SLUSH FUND\u2019 FOR ALLIES THREATENS ICE, BORDER PATROL PLAN<\/p>\n<p>That makes President Donald Trump\u2019s June 1 deadline effectively impossible to meet, but Republicans contend that it\u2019s the administration\u2019s actions that have further complicated an already rocky process.\u00a0<br \/>\n\u201cThe message to the administration is this: we were on a glide path to passing this bill until these announcements,\u201d a top Republican aide told Fox News Digital.\u00a0<br \/>\nThe timing of the settlement between Trump and his family and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the subsequent creation of the fund derailed Republicans\u2019 sprint to the finish line.<br \/>\n\u201cWe don\u2019t know where the votes are on reconciliation right now,\u201d Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., said.\u00a0<br \/>\nSENATE REPUBLICAN THREATENS TO DERAIL ICE, BORDER PATROL PACKAGE OVER TRUMP\u2019S BILLION-DOLLAR REQUEST<\/p>\n<p>The White House referred Fox News Digital to Trump\u2019s comments Thursday when asked if he would be amenable to no ballroom security funding and restrictions on the DOJ\u2019s nearly $1.8 billion fund, or veto the package outright.<br \/>\n\u201cI don\u2019t need money from the ballroom,\u201d Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, and touted that the actual construction was being done through private funding.<br \/>\n\u201cBut this is being made as a gift from me and other people that are great patriots that spent a lot of money,\u201d he continued. \u201cWe\u2019re building what will be the finest ballroom anywhere in the world. If they want to spend money on securing the White House, I think it would be very \u2014 very much a good expenditure.\u00a0 But the ballroom is being built.\u201d<br \/>\nActing Attorney General Todd Blanche was dispatched to the Hill Thursday morning to tamp down lawmakers\u2019 concerns over the \u201canti-weaponization\u201d fund, which several lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have dubbed a \u201cslush fund.\u201d But instead, he was berated behind closed doors.<br \/>\nA spokesperson for the Justice Department told Fox News Digital that Blanche had a \u201chealthy discussion on the settlement.\u201d<br \/>\n\u201cHe made clear that the Anti-Weaponization Fund announced Monday has nothing to do with reconciliation. Indeed, not a single dime from the money the president is seeking in reconciliation would go toward anything having to do with the fund,\u201d the spokesperson said. \u201cWe will continue to work with the Senate to get critical reconciliation funds approved.\u201d<br \/>\nTRUMP DEMANDS SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN\u2019S OUSTER FOR AXING BALLROOM SECURITY FUNDING<\/p>\n<p>Sources told Fox News Digital that over two dozen Republicans demanded answers from Blanche on what kind of guardrails could be put into the fund, and specifically if those convicted for assaulting police officers during the Jan. 6, 2021, riots could be excluded.\u00a0<br \/>\nSens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Tom Cotton, R-Ark., erupted at Blanche, and Thune was uncharacteristically frustrated by the situation.<br \/>\nSeveral Republicans leaving the meeting had little to say about what happened inside, while others reiterated that they were focused on funding ICE and Border Patrol and nothing else.\u00a0<br \/>\nThose concerns were validated by several people who were pardoned by Trump earlier this year, including former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, who declared that he would make a claim this week.\u00a0<br \/>\nThere have been discussions of including those guardrails into the reconciliation package, given that the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the DOJ, is a major part of the process.<br \/>\n\u201cI did raise that issue, and that seemed to be what [Blanche] was saying, but you know, we haven\u2019t seen language,\u201d Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said.\u00a0<br \/>\nFurther complicating matters are plans Senate Democrats had for the package with their flurry of amendment votes.<br \/>\nSources told Fox News Digital that one of the first amendments in the pipeline would have prevented any of the DOJ\u2019s funds from going to convicted rapists and forced the package to be sent back to committee, sending the GOP back to square one on a politically perilous vote.\u00a0<br \/>\n\u201cThis was all 100% avoidable,\u201d a senior Republican aide told Fox News Digital.\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<div>Senate Republicans are pressing pause on their push to fund immigration enforcement after a tense,&#8230;<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[230,1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35060"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=35060"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35060\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=35060"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=35060"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/investmentbankingrules.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=35060"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}