Rand Paul is facing an ICE funding dilemma

Just a few months ago, President Donald Trump denounced Rand Paul as a “sick wacko” who opposes “everything.” Now the Kentucky senator is a key gatekeeper for one of the president’s biggest priorities.

As chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Paul faces a stark choice as his fellow Republicans race to pass a party-line immigration enforcement bill by Trump’s June 1 deadline. At the same time, he’s confronting his own political future.

Paul’s colleagues sidelined him last year when he refused to give as big a cash infusion for border security as the White House wanted. Now he must decide whether to go along as GOP leaders discuss potentially funding parts of DHS for as long as a decade.

It would come as little surprise if Paul raised objections. Known in Washington as a perennial leadership gadfly, he’s repeatedly broken with Trump since January 2025 on everything from tariffs to the ongoing Iran war and last year’s deficit-busting megabill, where he was one of three Senate Republicans who voted no.

Paul is also eyeing a possible presidential run in 2028 as he tries to get the GOP to look past Trump’s dramatic expansion of federal power and illustrate there is still room for libertarian-leaning, small government Republicans like him.

Spokespeople for Paul and the committee he chairs did not respond to a request for an interview. They also did not respond to a question on whether they have gotten any guidance yet on what the Kentucky Republican’s role will be in the immigration enforcement funding push.

Under the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process GOP leaders are hoping to employ, Paul’s committee is expected to be asked to hand over legislative language as part of a bill that will deliver tens of billions of dollars to ICE and parts of Customs and Border Protection. Paul has criticized those agencies at times, suggesting they should not get a blank check as they face questions about their use of force.

“This isn’t because I want no ICE,” Paul told reporters earlier this year. “I want people to trust ICE. I want people to trust the immigration authorities and I think they do hard work.”

A senior White House official granted anonymity to speak candidly downplayed any concerns about Paul in the upcoming reconciliation bill, noting he recently backed the administration’s plans for a major White House renovation. The official also questioned whether Paul, who has repeatedly voted to advance a House-passed bill that includes immigration enforcement money, would want to be against DHS funding.

“Rand voted for the ballroom, right?” the official said, referring to Paul’s ex-officio vote on a D.C. planning board.

His colleagues are not as convinced.

“Rand generally votes no,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said in an interview.

Paul’s fellow Republicans likely wouldn’t have voluntarily picked the maverick senator to shape an immigration enforcement bill, but he secured the gavel on the Homeland Security panel last year by dint of seniority.

After spending years warning against an overreaching federal government, Paul raised pointed concerns about some of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January. He was also the only Republican to oppose Markwayne Mullin’s nomination as Homeland Security secretary, arguing in part he did not have the temperament to run the department.

During a recent CBS News interview, Paul argued more broadly that Congress wasn’t doing enough to check the administration and put the odds at “50-50” that he makes another run for the White House in 2028.

“I’m not going to do it just to do it,” Paul said. “It would be … because we need to have a free-market wing, we need to have a free-trade wing of the party who is not eager for war.”

Paul previously ran for president in 2016 but dropped out shortly after the Iowa caucuses. A bill currently moving through the Kentucky state legislature would allow Paul to run simultaneously for president and reelection to the Senate in 2028 — something he unsuccessfully pursued ahead of his 2016 run.

Trump, for his part, has repeatedly criticized Paul as a frequent roadblock in public remarks and on his Truth Social account — including the November “sick wacko” reference. He took notice this month when Paul agreed to green-light the White House ballroom in a vote of the National Capital Planning Commission. (Paul’s chief of staff attended the meeting and cast the vote on his behalf.)

“I am pleased to announce that even Board Member Senator Rand Paul, known as an extraordinarily difficult vote, voted a strong YES,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

But it was Paul’s spending-hawk tendencies that got him sidelined by the White House and his GOP colleagues last year as they sought to wrap up the party’s tax-cuts-focused megabill. Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in coordination with party leaders, effectively discarded Paul’s border security proposal and inserted his own language into the bill.

Paul and Graham had released substantially different proposals for funding under the Homeland Security panel’s jurisdiction. Paul proposed $6.5 billion for building the border wall, while Graham pitched $46.5 billion. Graham proposed $45 billion for ICE detention facilities, roughly twice what Paul proposed.

Graham at the time dismissed Paul’s pitch for a lower funding level as “shallow,” and members of the Homeland Security panel said Paul hadn’t consulted with them.

Paul has said little about how he is thinking about the upcoming GOP immigration enforcement push. He has separately warned that he does not support including funding for the Iran war in a reconciliation bill.

If the bill stays narrowly focused, Paul could have less sway as the bill is tightly negotiated by House and Senate Republican leaders, as well as the White House. The Judiciary Committee, not the committee Paul chairs, drafted a significant swath of the immigration language in last year’s megabill.

GOP colleagues aren’t vowing yet that they will sidestep him as they scramble to meet Trump’s deadline. But they are making clear that the DHS provisions will ultimately be decided by what can get the votes needed to clear the Senate — even if that does not comport with what the libertarian-leaning Kentuckian wants.

A GOP senator granted anonymity to speak candidly predicted Paul would have “influence” as the committee chair, but not a final say.

“Ultimately what it’ll come down to is where there’s 51 votes,” the senator added.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune added in an interview that Paul and other committee chairs tasked with writing the bill would have “input.”

Eli Stokols contributed to this report.