Congress Faces Standoff As Shutdown Stretches Into Week

On Saturday, January 31, 2026, the U.S. government entered a partial shutdown, a development that, while disruptive, has unfolded with a markedly different character from previous shutdowns. The immediate cause? Congress failed to approve a comprehensive spending package by the January 30 deadline, leaving several crucial federal agencies without funding. But the story behind the scenes is more complex—and more contentious—than a simple budgetary lapse.

Unlike the record-breaking shutdowns of years past, this one was expected to be short-lived. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, expressed confidence on NBC’s "Meet the Press" that the shutdown would end by Tuesday, February 4. "Let's say I'm confident that we'll do it at least by Tuesday," Johnson said, emphasizing his belief that the House could pass the necessary legislation to reopen shuttered parts of the government.

The shutdown’s roots stretch back to a series of tragic events earlier in January: the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens, Alex Pretti and Renée Good, by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis. According to MS NOW and The New York Times, these incidents ignited a political firestorm, with Democrats demanding sweeping reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) before agreeing to further funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the House Minority Leader, stated that Democrats would "evaluate the spending legislation passed by the Senate on its merits and then decide how to proceed legislatively," but underscored the need for "dramatic" reforms to ICE.

Negotiations reached a fever pitch as the Senate—after intense late-night talks between President Donald Trump and Democratic leaders—passed a bipartisan spending package by a 71-29 vote. This deal funded most of the government through the fiscal year but only extended DHS funding for two weeks, buying time for further negotiations over immigration enforcement. Twenty-four Democrats and five Republicans opposed the legislation, with Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland declaring, “I’ve made my position clear: not another dime for Trump’s lawless ICE operations means not another dime, not even for one more day.”

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, highlighted provisions in the DHS bill designed to address the recent tragedies. The bill includes $20 million for body-worn cameras and $2 million for de-escalation training, as well as a provision allowing the DHS inspector general to review and investigate detention centers. Collins remarked, “There has understandably been a great deal of attention focused on the Homeland Security portion,” adding that the fatal shooting of Pretti “must be thoroughly and impartially investigated.”

Despite the Senate’s approval, the House was on recess and unable to act before the shutdown deadline. The House Rules Committee was set to review the spending measure on Monday, February 3, with a final vote anticipated Tuesday. Johnson described the vote as "a formality," but acknowledged the logistical challenge of rallying his razor-thin majority—218 to 213, with that margin expected to shrink after a recent special election.

Democrats, however, signaled they would not provide the votes needed to fast-track the measure. Jeffries insisted, "The administration can't just talk the talk. They need to walk the walk. That should begin today. Not in two weeks, today." Some House Democrats, including Rep. Ro Khanna of California, went further, pledging to vote against the package. “I'm not just a no, I'm a firm no, and I'm going to advocate with colleagues that they vote no. I just in good conscience cannot vote to give more money to ICE agents as they're violating our constitutional rights,” Khanna said on "Meet the Press."

The shutdown’s impact, though real, has so far been limited. Agencies whose funding lapsed—most notably the Pentagon, DHS, and the Department of Transportation—continued essential operations, but workers faced the prospect of missed paychecks if the impasse dragged on. Some could be furloughed, while others, like air traffic controllers, were required to report for duty without pay. The IRS, which began tax season last week, told staff they would be "exempt from furlough" through Saturday, February 7, and would operate normally using funds from the Inflation Reduction Act.

Not all government services were at risk. Thanks to earlier congressional action, nutrition assistance programs such as SNAP and WIC remained fully funded. SNAP serves about 42 million Americans—roughly one in eight—providing an average of $190 per person each month. WIC, the supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children, was also insulated from the shutdown’s effects. Passport and visa services at the State Department continued uninterrupted, with embassies and consulates remaining open and nearly 19,000 of the department’s 27,000 direct hire employees exempt from potential furloughs.

Meanwhile, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had $7 to $8 billion in reserve for disaster response, enough to weather a short-term funding gap, though operations like renewing National Flood Insurance Program policies were paused. Experts warned that an extended shutdown could strain these resources, especially if new disasters struck.

Politically, the shutdown underscored deep divisions over immigration policy. Democrats pushed for reforms such as banning ICE personnel from covering their faces, requiring body cameras and visible identification, ending random sweeps, and mandating judicial warrants for home entries. They also called for independent investigations into the Minneapolis shootings. Some Republicans, like Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, expressed openness to certain reforms but insisted on targeting “sanctuary cities” that decline to cooperate with federal authorities. Others, including Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri, warned that the Democratic vision would make immigration enforcement “personally dangerous and professionally impossible.”

As the House prepared to vote, Johnson maintained that Republicans were ready to "demonstrate once again that this is the party that takes governing seriously." Yet, the bipartisan opposition in both chambers signaled that the path to a final agreement would not be smooth. The coming days promised more negotiations, more brinkmanship, and more uncertainty for federal workers and the public alike.

Still, the machinery of government, while slowed, continued to grind forward—proof that even amid political gridlock and tragedy, the nation’s institutions can adapt, regroup, and, with luck, find a way through the storm.