After weeks of Republican infighting over a controversial settlement fund tied to President Trump, the Senate approved a $70 billion spending package for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol in the early hours of Friday morning.

The legislation cleared the chamber on a 52-47 vote shortly before 5 a.m. following an overnight series of amendment votes known as a “vote-a-rama.” Among the defeated proposals was an amendment from Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) that sought to divert money from the settlement fund to law enforcement officers injured during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

The bill now heads to the House, where lawmakers are expected to consider it next week.

What Republican leaders hoped would be a straightforward vote centered on border enforcement instead turned into a prolonged internal battle over a $1.776 billion settlement fund established to compensate alleged victims of government weaponization.

For much of Thursday, GOP senators sparred over efforts to eliminate the fund, despite assurances from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche earlier in the week that the program would not move forward.

“This would have been done several hours ago if we weren’t having to deal with some of the issues around the fund,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) told reporters shortly before midnight Thursday.

The settlement fund emerged from an agreement resolving Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the disclosure of his tax returns to the New York Times. The newspaper published details from those returns in a September 2020 report examining Trump’s finances.

Although Thune publicly criticized the settlement fund, he spent weeks urging fellow Republicans to keep the border security bill narrowly tailored and avoid attaching provisions that might jeopardize its chances in the House.

Nevertheless, several Republican senators continued pressing for legislative action to prevent the settlement payouts, extending the fight well into the night.

Their push intensified after Trump cast uncertainty on the matter Wednesday afternoon, saying the settlement remained significant while declining to say whether it had been abandoned.

“That settlement is “very important” and “I don’t know” whether it is dead or on hold.

“I’d have to ask the lawyers,” he said.

The Senate’s first vote Thursday morning focused on an amendment offered by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to prohibit the settlement fund. The measure remained open for hours before ultimately failing by a 50-49 margin. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio, and Dan Sullivan of Alaska joined Democrats in support.

Lawmakers later overwhelmingly defeated a second proposal from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) that would have eliminated the settlement fund and redirected the money to a Justice Department anti-fraud initiative.

“If Blanche says this is largely inoperative, why not use this moment to codify that?” said Tillis, who is retiring rather than seeking another term this fall. “Otherwise, you’re exposing every one of our members who are in cycle to having to deal with this between today and Election Day, and that makes no sense for something that the DOJ says they’re not moving forward with.”

Cassidy’s amendment, which would have provided compensation to police officers injured during the Capitol riot, also failed on a 52-47 vote. The proposal highlighted concerns that individuals involved in the Jan. 6 attack could potentially qualify for payments under the settlement arrangement.

Cassidy argued that despite Blanche’s assurances, the settlement remained legally active and “absolutely can be used.”

Another unsuccessful amendment would have barred any payments to Jan. 6 defendants who assaulted law enforcement personnel during the riot.

Schumer sharply criticized Republicans for defeating the proposals, warning that Senate action left taxpayers with little more than assurances from Trump’s legal team.

“leaving taxpayers to rely on nothing more than a promise from Donald Trump’s personal fixer. That is not accountability. That is a permission slip.”

Passage of the legislation would bring an end to a funding standoff that began after two anti-ICE protesters were fatally shot by federal agents in Minnesota earlier this year.

Democrats had insisted that any new funding for the Department of Homeland Security be paired with policy changes governing immigration enforcement. Their demands included clearer identification requirements for federal officers, expanded use of judicial warrants, and additional oversight measures.

Following the Minnesota incident, Trump agreed to separate Homeland Security funding from a broader spending package that was eventually enacted. However, negotiations between the parties failed to produce an agreement on immigration enforcement reforms.

As a result, funding for portions of the department expired in mid-February, with no compromise in place.

Congress later approved funding for the remainder of the Department of Homeland Security at the end of April with Democratic support, but ICE and Border Patrol operations have continued without regular appropriations ever since.

{Matzav.com}