Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee who is poised to become its chairman, stated that he does not support defunding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), positioning himself against the 'Abolish ICE' movement gaining traction among progressive Democrats. Cuellar, who represents a southern border district including Laredo, told Fox News Digital that while he supports 'serious rail guards' for the agency, he believes the majority of Democrats do not support defunding ICE.
The statement comes as more than a dozen Democratic Socialists of America members have been elected or reelected to Congress, bringing 'Abolish ICE' to the forefront of party discourse. Cuellar characterized these progressives as 'one part of the spectrum,' noting the continued influence of moderate 'Blue Dog' Democrats who prioritize strong border and immigration enforcement policies. His position is significant given his upcoming role in controlling the allocation of federal funds for ICE.
What the Right Is Saying
Republicans and border security advocates view the 'Abolish ICE' movement as a dangerous shift that undermines national security. They point to the high volume of arrests and deportations under current enforcement operations as necessary measures to address illegal crossings and human smuggling. President Trump’s administration has highlighted these enforcement actions as a central pillar of its policy, contrasting them with the border policies of the Biden administration, which Cuellar himself warned against returning to.
Conservative lawmakers argue that local law enforcement should have a broader role in immigration enforcement than Cuellar suggests. Cuellar stated that local sheriffs should primarily report individuals found to be illegally present, but Republicans have pushed for expanded 287(g) agreements, which Texas law now requires most county sheriffs to seek. These agreements allow local officers to assist with jail screening and administrative warrants, a framework Republicans credit for enhancing enforcement capabilities in border states.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive Democrats and immigrant rights activists argue that ICE’s enforcement tactics, including operations in major cities like Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New Orleans, have been excessive. Critics point to the targeting of courthouses, churches, and job sites, as well as conditions in detention centers, as evidence that the agency requires fundamental restructuring or abolition. The fatal shootings of two American citizens by ICE agents in Minnesota in January 2026 further fueled backlash, leading Democratic governors in New York, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, and Minnesota to sign laws restricting state and local cooperation with federal immigration officials.
Within the party, voices like Texas Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa have criticized ICE tactics and Governor Greg Abbott’s use of state resources for federal immigration detention, calling it a political 'grandstand.' However, Hinojosa, who represents a border district, has not explicitly called for ending all cooperation with ICE, aligning more with the need for transparency and oversight rather than defunding. Rep. Cuellar echoed this nuanced stance, criticizing ICE for pursuing immigrants without criminal records—such as nuns, pastors, and Dreamers—while acknowledging that federal law permits arrests for civil immigration violations.
What the Numbers Show
According to the White House, sweeping immigration enforcement operations have resulted in more than 1.3 million arrests and the deportation or departure of 1.2 million illegal immigrants. Cuellar’s voting record reflects his moderate stance on immigration: he voted with Republicans in January to approve a Department of Homeland Security funding bill that included billions for ICE, though he later opposed a $70 billion Republican-backed enforcement package due to concerns about oversight. His district, which includes Laredo, is a major hub for Border Patrol operations.
The political landscape within the Democratic Party shows a divide between the progressive wing, which has grown to include over a dozen DSA members, and the moderate bloc represented by Cuellar. While 111 House Democrats have demanded the closure of a Texas detention center, and Democratic governors in six states have enacted laws restricting cooperation with federal immigration officials, Cuellar and Hinojosa represent a border-state Democratic perspective that accepts the necessity of enforcement mechanisms while demanding accountability. Cuellar attributed recent electoral losses in Texas partly to Trump’s immigration enforcement tactics, suggesting a complex relationship between enforcement visibility and voter sentiment.
The Bottom Line
Cuellar’s potential chairmanship of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee places him in a pivotal position to shape ICE funding and oversight requirements. His rejection of the 'defund' push signals a potential internal Democratic conflict between progressive activists demanding structural changes to ICE and moderates who prioritize electoral viability in border districts. With Texas law mandating expanded local cooperation through 287(g) agreements and Democratic governors in other states limiting it, the debate over the role of local law enforcement in immigration policy is likely to intensify as Congress approaches the next appropriations cycle.