Opposition to a controversial immigration compromise is exploding among conservative activists and lawmakers who say Senate leaders are pushing a stealth nationwide amnesty through delayed Department of Homeland Security funding language. The outcry intensified Tuesday night after Senate Democrats and Republicans agreed to hold up the DHS spending bill while negotiating “minor changes” that critics say would make it far harder to deport non‑violent illegal migrants.
Pro‑American legislators and grassroots groups argue the tweaks amount to a backdoor amnesty that helps both progressive activists and corporate interests by preserving a large foreign workforce that can be used to suppress wages and undercut American workers.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R‑AL) summed up the backlash on social media, saying, “We should not give Democrats a single INCH when it comes to backing law enforcement. Enforce the law. Deport criminals.” Radio host Mark Levin echoed the criticism, warning Republicans are beginning to discuss deporting only violent offenders while granting a “pathway to citizenship” for others — a shift the host called “disastrous.”
The Heritage Foundation weighed in with stricter language, insisting there should be “No amnesty. More deportations. Period.” Former GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz slammed any compromise, tweeting, “Talking about amnesty is establishment blather. I want to see every illegal deported.” TV host Megyn Kelly also criticized the negotiations, saying, “I’m sorry, but that’s not what we voted for.”
Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R‑OK) defended maintaining strong immigration enforcement overall, insisting, “We’re not going to keep ICE from doing their job. The American people wanted the president to enforce law and order, and ICE is doing their job.” Meanwhile, Sen. James Lankford (R‑OK) said the DHS spending package already includes oversight measures like body cameras and sees no need for additional changes.
Critics point to economic shifts that have made illegal migration a politically volatile issue. With Trump administration policies tightening labor markets, rent prices dropping in some major cities, and migrants filling low‑wage jobs, activists argue establishment negotiators want to soften enforcement to keep cheap labor available. Rosemary Jenks of the Immigration Accountability Project said that allowing illegal migrant work authorization, even without a citizenship path, amounts to amnesty in all but name.
The bipartisan talks reportedly include proposals Democrats favor, such as warrant requirements for certain immigration arrests, stronger cooperation with state and local officials, and more procedural protections for detainees. Opponents say these so‑called minor rules would cripple deportation enforcement, especially in sanctuary jurisdictions.
Some Republicans, like Sen. Rand Paul (R‑KY) and former Rep. Newt Gingrich, argue for a middle ground allowing long‑term illegal residents to work without welfare or voting rights, while others like Sen. Lindsey Graham push sanctions on sanctuary cities as part of a deal with the White House. GOP governors such as Oklahoma’s Kevin Stitt have also voiced support for using migrant labor without granting full citizenship.
On the Democratic side, leaders like Sen. Chuck Schumer are reportedly seeking bipartisan reforms to immigration enforcement, including limits on masked officers and new operational rules for ICE and CBP. At the same time, voices like Sen. Michael Bennet (D‑CO) are drafting legislation to further restrict how DHS handles migrant detention and protections for minors.
As the battle over the DHS funding bill continues, the fierce response from pro‑American activists and conservative lawmakers highlights deep divisions within both parties over how to balance immigration enforcement with economic and political pressures ahead of the 2026 elections.
