Cambio

Resultado

A partial government shutdown affecting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is all but guaranteed unless the Senate rams through a short-term extension of current funding levels sometime on Thursday.

But avoiding a DHS shutdown means the same measure must also pass the House of Representatives, where success will depend on delicate political maneuvering by Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to persuade a House Republican Conference with varying ideas of what a path forward should look like.

«It would have to be for 60 or 90 days, I would think,» said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus. «I don’t know what’s going to happen in 30 days, I don’t know what’s going to change.»

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., is expected to unveil a stopgap funding measure for DHS called a continuing resolution (CR), which would extend the department’s current budget for a yet-unknown amount of time.

ICE SHUTDOWN FIGHT MIGHT RESTRICT FEMA, COAST GUARD TO ‘LIFE-THREATENING’ EMERGENCIES

It comes after Democrats walked away en masse from a bipartisan deal to fund DHS through the end of fiscal year (FY) 2026 over what they saw as insufficient guardrails on agencies responsible for President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis and elsewhere.

Congress has funded 97% of the federal government through FY2026 at this point. But DHS is a vast department with a broad jurisdiction that includes the U.S. Coast Guard, the Secret Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) — all of which will see varying levels of disruptions if a shutdown happens.

Republicans largely want to avoid such a situation but have made clear they believe that its effects would fall squarely on Democrats’ shoulders.

DEMOCRATS SPLIT ON SHIELDING COAST GUARD, SECRET SERVICE AS DHS SHUTDOWN THREAT NEARS

Conservatives like Norman favor an extended CR, arguing that it would fund Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at a higher level than the initial bipartisan funding deal would have while removing Democrats’ negotiating leverage for more guardrails on those agents.

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., told Fox News Digital last week that he would support a full-year CR for DHS to «make sure that FEMA is funded and TSA is funded, and stop the drama.»

Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., similarly said on Wednesday, «I think we’d like to push it out as far as we can so we can avoid the constant uncertainty for the agency.»

Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., leaves the U.S. Capitol after the last votes of the week on Thursday, Sept. 4, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

THUNE BLASTS JEFFRIES, SCHUMER AS ‘AFRAID OF THEIR SHADOWS’ AS DHS FUNDING FIGHT HEATS UP

«As long as this hangs up in the air, let’s say you do it for three, four months, the Democrats are gonna want a pound of flesh to help pass whatever it is. And I think that’s gonna weaken the efforts of … immigration enforcement,» Crane told Fox News Digital.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., told reporters earlier this week that he would favor a mid-length CR over something shorter.

«If we do two weeks and they leave for a week, it’s really a one-week CR. Nothing’s going to happen when that many important people are gone. So I think four weeks makes a lot more sense,» Cole said.

But committee member Rep. John Rutherford, R-Fla., panned the idea of a CR altogether.

«CRs don’t work. CRs are not without pain. It disrupts a lot of your supply chain and purchasing and acquisition,» he told Fox News Digital. «I can’t believe they’re even thinking about it.»

Rutherford, a former sheriff, argued that a shutdown or CR would harm critical national security operations during a year that’s expected to see a host of high-security events in the U.S. like America’s 250th anniversary celebration, the FIFA World Cup, and others.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., prepares for a hearing in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Johnson declined to share his thoughts on CR length when asked by Fox News Digital on Tuesday, but emphasized the House GOP’s position that the Senate should take up the bipartisan bill that Democrats initially walked away from.

«I’m not going to prejudge the length of it or what it should be. I’m very hopeful. I mean, we still have time on the clock. When there’s a will, there’s a way. And if they can come to an agreement on this and get it done, that will behoove the whole country,» Johnson said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

House GOP leaders will likely need nearly all Republicans on board to pass a CR for DHS, with many Democrats warning they will not support any funding for the department without seeing proof of critical reform.

Jeffries would not go into specifics about what he would support or oppose in terms of DHS funding during his weekly press conference on Monday, but he suggested to reporters that a simple stopgap funding bill with no changes to ICE funding was out of the question. 

«ICE is out of control right now. The American people know it, and ICE clearly needs to be reined in,» Jeffries said. «Our position has been clear. Dramatic changes are needed at the Department of Homeland Security before a DHS funding bill moves forward. Period. Full stop.»

La Corte Constitucional de Ecuador admitió a trámite dos demandas de inconstitucionalidad presentadas contra leyes aprobadas por la Asamblea Nacional a partir de proyectos calificados como urgentes en materia económica por el presidente Daniel Noboa. Se trata de las causas 118-25-IN, relacionada con la Ley Orgánica de Transparencia Social, y 160-25-IN, respecto de la Ley de Fortalecimiento y Sostenibilidad Crediticia, ambas publicadas en 2025 y remitidas por el Ejecutivo bajo el procedimiento abreviado previsto en la Constitución.

En el caso 118-25-IN, la Sala de Admisión avocó conocimiento el 4 de febrero de 2026 y resolvió admitir la acción pública de inconstitucionalidad por la forma contra la Ley Orgánica de Transparencia Social. El accionante sostiene que la norma vulnera el principio de unidad de materia al incluir disposiciones reformatorias en ámbitos tributarios y mineros que, a su criterio, no guardan conexidad con el objeto principal de la ley. En su demanda, argumenta que la incorporación de reformas sobre dividendos, utilidades no distribuidas y fases de exploración minera habría desbordado el eje temático del proyecto original, afectando los artículos 82, 136, 137 y 424 de la Constitución.

El tribunal de admisión consideró que los cargos expuestos cumplen con los requisitos formales y argumentativos previstos en la Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional (LOGJCC), en particular en cuanto a la claridad y pertinencia de los argumentos sobre la supuesta infracción constitucional. En consecuencia, dispuso correr traslado a la Presidencia de la República, a la Asamblea Nacional y a la Procuraduría General del Estado para que, en el término de quince días, intervengan defendiendo o impugnando la constitucionalidad de la norma.

Por su parte, en la causa 160-25-IN, la Corte admitió a trámite la acción pública de inconstitucionalidad presentada por la Fundación Regional de Asesoría en Derechos Humanos (INREDH) contra disposiciones específicas de la Ley de Fortalecimiento y Sostenibilidad Crediticia. La demanda se dirige, por el fondo, contra reformas introducidas a la Ley del Banco del Instituto Ecuatoriano de Seguridad Social (BIESS) y a la Ley de Seguridad Social.

Entre los puntos cuestionados se encuentran las disposiciones que permiten al BIESS realizar operaciones de reporto, gestionar créditos con entidades financieras nacionales o extranjeras y pignorar parte de su portafolio de inversiones, así como la posibilidad de vender cartera vencida. La accionante sostiene que estas medidas podrían afectar la intangibilidad de los fondos y reservas de la seguridad social, protegidos por el artículo 372 de la Constitución, y comprometer el derecho a la seguridad social reconocido en el artículo 34. Asimismo, impugna la reforma que modifica el mecanismo de designación del vocal representante de la Función Ejecutiva en el Consejo Directivo del IESS y la norma que atribuye al propio IESS la determinación del presupuesto para el proceso electoral de sus representantes.

La Sala de Admisión verificó que la demanda cumple con los requisitos del artículo 79 de la LOGJCC y que los cargos formulados permiten, en la fase de sustanciación, plantear problemas jurídicos sobre la compatibilidad de las normas impugnadas con la Constitución. Por ello, resolvió admitir la causa sin que ello implique un pronunciamiento sobre el fondo. En ambos casos, la Corte enfatizó que la admisión a trámite no constituye prejuzgamiento.

En la causa 160-25-IN, el tribunal negó además la solicitud de medidas cautelares que buscaba suspender provisionalmente las disposiciones impugnadas, al considerar que la argumentación presentada no acreditaba de manera suficiente los requisitos de verosimilitud, inminencia y gravedad exigidos por la LOGJCC.

Con estas decisiones, la Corte Constitucional abre la fase de sustanciación de dos procesos que cuestionan la validez formal y material de leyes tramitadas bajo el mecanismo de urgencia económica, lo que reabre el debate sobre los límites del procedimiento legislativo abreviado y el alcance de las reformas en materia financiera y de seguridad social impulsadas por el Ejecutivo.