hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Abolishes U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by ending its funding.
Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI) introduced this bill.
In committee, no House vote yet.
This bill, known as the "Abolish ICE Act," would immediately cut all federal funding for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and formally abolish the agency 90 days after the bill becomes law. Sponsored by Representative Shri Thanedar, a Democrat from Michigan, the bill has been referred to several House committees for review, meaning it is still in the early stages of the legislative process.
Introduced Jan 15, 2026
H.R. 7123 was introduced in the House of Representatives on January 15, 2026, and referred to the House Committees on the Judiciary, Ways and Means, and Homeland Security. For the bill to move forward, it must be considered and approved by these committees. If it passes committee, it would then be eligible for a vote by the full House of Representatives before potentially moving to the Senate.
If this bill passes, all federal funding for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would immediately cease, and the agency would be formally abolished after 90 days. This means that ICE's current functions, such as immigration arrests, detentions, and deportations, would no longer be carried out by a dedicated federal agency. Any remaining assets or debts of ICE would be transferred to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Supporters Say
Supporters argue ICE prioritizes aggressive enforcement over due process, has a history of problematic actions, and is beyond reform.
Critics Say
Critics would likely argue that abolishing ICE would create a significant gap in immigration enforcement and national security.
Arguments in favor of the bill, as outlined in its 'Findings' section, point to ICE's history of aggressive enforcement, including mass arrests of non-criminal immigrants, and numerous incidents leading to deaths, injuries, and mistreatment. The bill claims ICE has been 'weaponized to inflict terror' and is 'past the point of reform.' Those against the bill would likely emphasize the importance of a federal agency to enforce immigration laws, maintain border security, and address threats to national security, arguing that a complete abolition would leave these crucial functions unaddressed.