House Republicans are sharply divided over a Senate-passed Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding deal, leaving Speaker Mike Johnson confronting a volatile internal backlash as he weighs how—and whether—to bring the measure to a vote.
The Senate approved the proposal early Friday morning in a voice vote, funding most DHS operations while excluding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) enforcement and parts of Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The move shifts the focus squarely to the House, where Johnson must navigate competing demands from conservatives and more pragmatic Republicans concerned about the prolonged shutdown.
Johnson declined to commit to a path forward, telling reporters simply, “Stay tuned,” when asked whether he would keep lawmakers in Washington through the weekend to pass the bill. Behind that brief response lies a complex political calculation, as GOP leadership gauges whether the conference can unite behind the Senate framework—or whether the legislation will fracture along ideological lines.
“This is not a done deal,” Rep. Austin Scott said, blasting the Senate’s handling of the vote. “A bunch of cowards — they didn’t even take a recorded vote.”
The criticism reflects broader frustration among conservative lawmakers, particularly within the House Freedom Caucus, who argue the Senate bill falls short of Republican priorities on immigration enforcement. Rep. Andy Harris, chairman of the conservative bloc, said his group would oppose the measure unless it is revised.
Instead, Harris and other hard-liners are pushing for the House to amend the bill to restore full funding for ICE and CBP, while also attaching election integrity provisions such as the SAVE America Act. Their strategy would effectively send the legislation back to the Senate—delaying any immediate resolution and extending the shutdown.
Johnson acknowledged the tension, saying he would work to reflect the “will of the conference,” but each procedural option available carries political risk.
One path would involve advancing the bill through a traditional rule vote, requiring near-unanimous Republican support—an uncertain prospect given conservative opposition. Alternatively, Johnson could attempt to pass the bill under suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority and would depend on Democratic votes, a move likely to inflame GOP hard-liners who oppose relying on the minority party to pass major legislation.
Complicating matters further, House rules currently prohibit suspension votes later in the week, limiting Johnson’s procedural flexibility and increasing pressure to act quickly.
Some Republicans, particularly moderates, are increasingly eager to pass the Senate deal to restore funding and stabilize operations. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick signaled support for swift action, saying, “I hope they do,” when asked about moving the bill forward.
Others, however, argue that accepting the Senate framework would effectively concede on key policy priorities.
Johnson himself expressed concern about the consequences of leaving border enforcement underfunded. “We want to solve these problems as quickly as possible,” he said, “but we also understand this dangerous gambit about not funding the border… is a serious problem.”
The Senate is not scheduled to return until mid-April, meaning any changes made by the House could prolong the standoff significantly. Outside the Capitol, the debate has taken on an increasingly heated tone. Johnson, speaking earlier about the shutdown’s impact, sharply criticized Democrats for opposing GOP-backed funding measures.
“Only one party on the Hill is willing to fund all of the security and safety of the American people,” Johnson said. “It’s very sad that Democrats are not interested in doing that… It is shameful.”
He also pointed to the human cost of the shutdown, warning that prolonged disruptions could have serious consequences. “So many people have been through so many hardships because of this nonsense,” Johnson said. “What we’re concerned about is people may actually be hurt.”