Democrats Vow to Rein In ICE After Winning Congress, but in Florida, the 287(g) Capital, Their Power Is Mostly Oversight

Democrats who won control of Congress in Tuesday's midterm elections campaigned on reining in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but their power to change how the agency operates in Florida, the state with more local police partnerships with ICE than any other, will rest mostly on oversight rather than money. The agency is funded through the rest of President Donald Trump's term by the 2025 Republican budget law, and any attempt to claw back that funding would likely face a veto, according to an analysis by Scripps News published by WPTV.

That leaves investigations, subpoenas and public hearings as the new majority's main tools, and the administration has signaled it will resist them. In Florida, where state law requires sheriffs to cooperate with ICE and the state built its own detention sites, those hearings could put the state's enforcement model under a national spotlight.

What Democrats promised

Democrats ran in part on checking ICE, though affordability and the economy drove much of their win, WPTV reported. Texas Democrat James Talarico, who won a U.S. Senate seat, put it bluntly during the campaign: "We have masked men in unmarked vehicles kidnapping people off our street."

The day after the election, senior Democrats laid out their investigative plans. Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, posted "Lawyer up" on X as results came in and listed ICE operations among his five priorities, according to an Associated Press report published by WKMG. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, expected to chair the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, said he wants hearings on ICE raids.

When former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem wrote that the administration "was too successful" in its first year, the Democrat expected to lead the Senate Homeland Security Committee replied, "Want to say that under oath?" WPTV reported.

What Congress can and can't do

Congress sets ICE's budget and could withhold future money, WPTV noted. But Republicans approved major increases for the agency under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which keeps ICE well funded through the end of Trump's term, and reversing that would require legislation Trump could veto.

Oversight is different. A PolitiFact analysis published by WLRN noted that the new majority does not need Trump's permission to investigate the executive branch. Catholic University political scientist Matthew Green said Congress "has subpoena power and the ability to use public hearings," and can compel testimony from allies of the White House outside government. Frank O. Bowman III, an emeritus law professor at the University of Missouri, said the House can obtain documents and testimony from people beyond Trump's control, including former officials and outside companies.

The limits are real. Under divided government, Congress has little power to push the Justice Department to prosecute anyone, and officials can stonewall. An Aug. 10, 2026, opinion from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel argues for a broad view of executive privilege, and Penn State Dickinson Law fellow Stanley Brand said subpoena fights are "very likely" to be drawn out, according to PolitiFact.

Impeachment of Cabinet officials is another option experts raised, with precedents including Homeland Security Secretary Alexander Mayorkas in 2024. Neither Mayorkas nor Secretary of War William Belknap, impeached in 1876, was convicted. Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, in line to chair the House Judiciary Committee, said of impeachment: "It's a tool in the constitutional toolkit, but we understand it's not a panacea."

The Department of Homeland Security has already pushed back. DHS general counsel James Percival accused Democrats of "political shenanigans" and said the department was "well prepared to deal with this nonsense," adding that Secretary Markwayne Mullin can keep focusing on protecting the homeland, WPTV reported.

Florida's 287(g) network

Florida has more 287(g) agreements than any other state, largely because state law requires county sheriff's offices to participate, WUSF and WLRN reported in July. The agreements let local officers perform basic immigration enforcement tasks on ICE's behalf.

The figures presented at a June 30 meeting of the State Immigration Enforcement Council show the program's reach and its gaps:

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri urged reluctant agencies to fully take part: "Either you're doing it or you're not, and you know it's required, and people just need to do it." Advocates have argued that routine traffic stops, such as for driving without a license, which people without legal status cannot obtain in Florida, can lead to jail stays and ICE holds.

The state's own agencies are part of the network. Sworn officers in the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services' Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement became certified under the 287(g) program in July 2025, Commissioner Wilton Simpson's office announced at the time, according to Florida Politics.

Because 287(g) agreements are signed with ICE and required by Florida law, a Democratic Congress cannot cancel them on its own. It can hold hearings on how they are used and press DHS for data.

Florida's detention sites

Florida also built state-run detention capacity. The Everglades facility widely known as "Alligator Alcatraz" opened July 3, 2025, and operated for about 11 months. In mid-June 2026, DHS said all detainees had been transferred to other facilities, citing hurricane season, the AP reported. Gov. Ron DeSantis said in May that the site was always meant to be temporary and had processed and deported 22,000 detainees. The ACLU has sued the state and federal governments, alleging detainees lacked access to lawyers.

The state has sought federal money for the site. In May, Florida had requested $608 million in federal reimbursement, WKMG reported. A later WUSF report said the Trump administration had paid Florida a first $58 million in reimbursements, according to the state.

A second state site, the so-called "Deportation Depot" in a former prison in Baker County west of Jacksonville, opened in September 2025 and was still holding detainees in October, with about 1,000 people inside, according to Jacksonville Today.

Florida Democrats already probing ICE

Florida Democrats have been laying groundwork. In May, Rep. Maxwell Frost of Orlando and Garcia led House Oversight Democrats on visits to Florida detention sites, including the Orange County jail, and launched an inquiry into what Frost described as ICE's practice of driving detainees around in vans after a 48 to 72 hour detainer hold expired, then returning them to be rebooked. "What we heard today across the State of Florida is deeply disturbing," Frost said, according to WKMG. DHS responded at the time that Florida is "a valuable partner" and that it "continuously evaluates detention needs." Frost and Garcia said they would introduce legislation to end indefinite immigrant detention.

With Garcia expected to lead the Oversight Committee in the majority, that inquiry would carry subpoena power it lacked in the minority.

A Florida company in the crosshairs

Scripps News' "ICE Inc." investigation found that DHS has awarded immigration contracts to private companies, sometimes without standard competitive bidding, producing record revenue for for-profit detention operators. GEO Group, the Boca Raton-based company that owns the most ICE detention centers, spent more than $7 million on the election to help keep Republicans in office, WPTV reported. Contracting is the kind of issue oversight committees can examine through document requests and hearings.

What's next

Democrats take control of both chambers when the new Congress is sworn in in January. Until then, Republicans run the lame-duck session. Once in the majority, Democrats can schedule hearings on ICE raids, Florida detention practices and federal contracts, and issue subpoenas to DHS, though the White House is expected to fight many of them in court and through claims of executive privilege.

What they cannot easily do is cut off ICE's money or end Florida's partnerships with the agency without Trump's signature. For Floridians, the likely result over the next two years is more public scrutiny of how immigration enforcement works in the state, rather than a quick change in how it operates.