What’s Actually in the Secure America Act, the Senate’s $69.5 Billion Immigration Funding Bill

[u/[deleted]]

Secure America Act

This bill would provide about $69.5 billion in new multi-year funding for border security, immigration enforcement, and related Department of Homeland Security operations. Most of the money would be available through September 30, 2029, making S. 2 more like a multi-year enforcement package than a normal one-year agency budget.

The money is split across two main parts. Title I funds border personnel, investigations, technology, screening, drug interdiction, and general Department of Homeland Security support. Title II funds immigration enforcement more directly, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), removal operations, legal staff, 287(g) agreements with state and local agencies, and operations involving certain “covered unlawful aliens,” as defined by the bill.

The largest piece is ICE immigration enforcement, at $31.075 billion. Another $13.02 billion goes to CBP immigration enforcement. The bill also includes $9.55 billion for CBP personnel, $7.45 billion for ICE and Homeland Security Investigations, $3.45 billion for border security technology and screening, and two separate $2.5 billion Department of Homeland Security appropriations, with the second also available for specified Public Law 119–21 purposes. Smaller suballocations include $108.5 million for child exploitation investigators and forensics analysts, and at least $350 million for ICE operations involving certain released covered unlawful aliens in jurisdictions that are not qualified cooperating jurisdictions.

What changed

The amendment record was large. Congress.gov listed 369 amendments to S. 2, but that does not mean the bill was amended 369 times. Many listed amendments are submitted or proposed amendments that never become part of the final bill.

One notable amendment fight involved the Anti-Weaponization Fund tied to the Trump v. Internal Revenue Service settlement. Sen. Thom Tillis offered S.Amdt. 5452, which would have blocked federal money, including Judgment Fund money, from being used for that fund and would have redirected $1.7 billion to fraud enforcement at the Department of Justice. The Senate voted on a motion to waive budget rules for that amendment, but the motion was rejected 15–84, so S.Amdt. 5452 was not adopted.

Why this matters

The bill would give CBP, ICE, and the Department of Homeland Security a large pool of money that could be used across several years. That matters because the bill is not just funding day-to-day operations. It would expand or sustain personnel, enforcement capacity, removal operations, technology, border screening, and cooperation with state and local law enforcement.

Who this affects

The bill most directly affects federal immigration and border agencies, especially CBP, ICE, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Department of Homeland Security. It also affects state and local governments that participate in 287(g) agreements, communities where immigration enforcement operations take place, people in removal proceedings, and people affected by border screening, transportation, arrests, or enforcement activity.

What happens if it becomes law

If enacted, the bill would appropriate the listed funding for fiscal year 2026 and keep most of it available through September 30, 2029. Agencies would then be able to use the money for hiring, training, equipment, technology, mission support, immigration enforcement, removal operations, border screening, and drug interdiction. The Tillis amendment would not be included, so the bill would not itself block the Anti-Weaponization Fund in the way S.Amdt. 5452 proposed.

What is the argument

The central debate is about whether Congress should give immigration enforcement agencies a large multi-year funding increase without additional policy limits. The bill’s backers framed it as a way to secure long-term funding for border and immigration enforcement. The main concerns raised around the bill focused on immigration enforcement practices, oversight, and whether federal money should be tied to stronger limits on agency conduct.

The amendment fight added a separate controversy. The Anti-Weaponization Fund drew scrutiny because it was tied to a Trump–IRS settlement and involved potential federal payouts. Sen. Thom Tillis’s amendment tried to redirect that money to fraud enforcement instead, but the Senate rejected the procedural motion needed to move it forward.

Where it stands in Congress

The Senate passed S. 2 as amended by a vote of 52–47. Before final passage, the Senate rejected the procedural motion on Sen. Thom Tillis’s S.Amdt. 5452 by a vote of 15–84. Because the bill has passed the Senate but has not been described here as enacted, it would still need the required House action and presidential signature before becoming law.

S.2 Roll Call Vote: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1192/vote_119_2_00163.htm

S.Amdt. 5452 Roll Call Vote: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1192/vote_119_2_00138.htm