The Secret Funding Loophole: How Kristi Noem Is Using a Special Trump Law to Block Democrat Oversight

The battle over who gets to see inside the nation’s immigration detention centers has erupted again in federal court.

House Democrats filed an emergency motion on Monday asking a judge to block a new directive from DHS Secretary Kristi Noem that requires lawmakers to give seven days’ advance notice before visiting ICE facilities. The Democrats argue this rule is a blatant attempt to hide conditions from congressional oversight, defying a previous court order.

The administration, however, claims it has found a legal workaround: by funding the detention centers exclusively through President Trump’s signature “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), they argue they are no longer bound by the congressional rules attached to standard budget appropriations.

At a Glance: The Oversight Fight

• The Order: Secretary Noem issued a directive requiring members of Congress to provide 7 days’ advance notice before visiting ICE facilities.
• The Lawsuit: A coalition of House Democrats, including Rep. Joe Neguse and Rep. Adriano Espaillat, is asking U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb to block the rule.
• The Legal Argument: Democrats say the rule violates Section 527, a federal law prohibiting the use of appropriated funds to block congressional access.
• The Loophole: DHS argues Section 527 applies only to standard appropriations. By funding detention centers via the new OBBBA, they claim they are exempt from the restriction.
• The Context: The directive comes just one day after a fatal shooting involving an ICE officer, fueling Democratic urgency to inspect facilities.

‘Obstructing Congressional Oversight’

The lawsuit is led by top Democrats on the Judiciary, Oversight, and Homeland Security committees. They argue that requiring a week’s notice allows ICE to sanitize facilities before lawmakers arrive, defeating the purpose of an inspection.

Last year, Judge Cobb temporarily blocked a similar rule, stating DHS couldn’t enforce it unless they proved no Section 527 funds were being used. Democrats contend that Noem’s new directive is a “duplicate policy” that mocks the court’s earlier stay.

“Defendants’ duplicate notice policy once again obstructs congressional oversight of ICE detention facilities at a time of continuing reports of increasingly violent behavior.” — House Democrats Statement

The lawmakers are asking for an emergency hearing and a “show cause” order requiring DHS to explain exactly how they switched funding sources so quickly to evade the law.

The ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ Defense

The Department of Homeland Security is doubling down, citing a specific legislative victory from the first year of the Trump administration.

Assistant Secretary McLaughlin told Fox News Digital that because ICE detention operations are now funded through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, they are legally distinct from the funds controlled by Section 527.

“The court also ruled that funding derived from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is exempt from this limitation… This guidance has been issued to protect all parties.” — DHS Statement

DHS maintains that unannounced visits create security risks and pull officers away from their duties. They argue the seven-day rule is about safety and logistics, not secrecy.

Timing and Tension

The dispute arrives at a critical moment.

First, reports of a fatal shooting involving an ICE officer have heightened scrutiny on the agency’s use of force. Second, the current Continuing Resolution (CR) funding the government is set to expire at the end of the month.

Democrats argue they cannot negotiate a new budget or hold the agency accountable if they are barred from seeing what is actually happening on the ground. By invoking the OBBBA, the Trump administration is effectively daring the courts to rule on whether a President can use special legislative funding streams to bypass standard congressional oversight checks.

As the clock ticks toward the budget deadline, Judge Cobb will have to decide if Secretary Noem’s funding shell game is a brilliant legal maneuver or an unconstitutional breach of checks and balances.