Senate Democrats are at a crossroads: advance a bill that would significantly expand the Department of Homeland Security’s surveillance powers, or side with voters who have already voiced strong opposition to funding ICE. The Combating Organized Crime Act, which passed the House last month with support from 144 Democrats, is now headed to the upper chamber, and it’s already stirring a fierce backlash.
The bill is pitched as a crackdown on organized retail theft, a problem that has hit retailers hard. But critics argue it’s a thinly veiled giveaway to DHS, granting the agency sweeping new surveillance authority at a time when public trust is fraying. Just weeks ago, every Democrat in Congress voted against nearly $70 billion in additional funding for ICE and CBP, signaling they heard voters’ concerns about the agency’s accountability. Now, they face a test of consistency.
“Why would Democrats, after rejecting ICE funding, turn around and hand DHS even more power?” asked a senior Democratic aide who requested anonymity. “This is a political landmine.”
In the House, the bill’s passage was anything but smooth. Ten Democratic co-sponsors withdrew their support the night of the vote, suggesting they saw the measure for what it was. The backlash was immediate. In Michigan, state Representative Donovan McKinney slammed his opponent for voting “to hand ICE and Trump your data.” Similar attacks have hit candidates in Maryland, Massachusetts, and elsewhere, with primary challengers like Abdul El-Sayed, Ethan Wechtaluk, and Jason Poulos using the vote as a rallying cry.
The political calculus is especially fraught given the broader landscape. With Democrats already blasting the Supreme Court’s ruling on TPS and sounding alarms on voting rights ahead of 2026, the party is juggling multiple flashpoints. Adding a surveillance expansion to the mix could alienate the progressive base that helped drive the ICE funding rejection.
Senate Democrats now must weigh the bill’s merits against its political fallout. The retail industry, a powerful lobbying force, is pushing hard for passage. But grassroots activists and civil liberties groups are mobilizing against it, warning that the bill would erode privacy and empower a department already under scrutiny for its role in immigration enforcement.
The clock is ticking. With primary season ramping up, any vote in favor could become a liability. As one strategist put it, “This is exactly the kind of vote that gets played in attack ads for years.”
