Shutdown Statement: Multiple Misleading Claims About Democrats, ICE, and His Own Record

Immigration Source: Facebook Post MISLEADING

Original source → · Archived copy →

Correction (June 15, 2026): An earlier version of this entry stated that Rep. Langworthy voted NO on H.R. 10545 on December 19, 2024. That was incorrect. Per House Clerk roll-call records, Langworthy voted YEA on H.R. 10545 (the American Relief Act, 2025), which passed 366–34 on December 20, 2024 (Roll Call 517) and became law — no government shutdown occurred. He also voted YEA on the earlier H.R. 10515 (Roll Call 516, December 19, 2024), which failed 174–235. The December 2024 record does not show Langworthy voting against a continuing resolution, so the FALSE verdict on Claim 1 has been withdrawn.

Statement

Source: Facebook Post, February 2, 2026

“I am opposed to government shutdowns–and always have been– but once again we find ourselves in one over Democrats’ refusal to fund the Department of Homeland Security. This is wrong, dangerous, and puts America’s ability to protect our homeland at grave risk. We cannot play political games with our national security. Democrats have been on a quest to defund ICE and implement their sanctuary policies nationwide long before tensions rose in Minnesota.”

Why This Matters for NY-23

This shutdown affected federal workers throughout the district, delayed tax refunds, and created uncertainty for programs rural communities depend on. When the stated reasons for the shutdown are misleading — blaming Democrats for “defunding ICE” when the dispute actually began after two American citizens were shot by federal agents — constituents can’t make informed judgments about who’s responsible or what reforms might prevent future shutdowns.

Claim-by-Claim Analysis

Claim 1: “Always have been” opposed to shutdowns

Verdict: CORRECTION — prior FALSE rating withdrawn

This entry originally rated the claim FALSE on the basis that Langworthy voted NO on H.R. 10545 in December 2024. That was a factual error (see the correction note above). The corrected record, from the House Clerk’s roll calls:

  • December 19, 2024 — H.R. 10515 (“American Relief Act”): FAILED 174–235. Langworthy voted YEA (Roll Call 516).
  • December 20, 2024 — H.R. 10545 (“American Relief Act, 2025”): PASSED 366–34 and became law; no government shutdown occurred. Langworthy voted YEA (Roll Call 517).
DateBillLangworthy’s VoteOutcome
December 19, 2024H.R. 10515 (American Relief Act)YEAFailed 174–235
December 20, 2024H.R. 10545 (American Relief Act, 2025)YEAPassed 366–34
September 2025House CRYESPassed House, failed Senate
November 2025Shutdown-ending billYESPassed 222–209

The December 2024 votes do not show Langworthy voting against a continuing resolution, so they do not support a FALSE rating on this claim. This site is not assigning a new verdict to the underlying “always opposed” statement on the current record.

Claim 2: Democrats “refused to fund” DHS

Verdict: MISLEADING

Democrats accepted a two-week continuing resolution for DHS (through February 13) while agreeing to fund five of six other appropriations bills for the full year.

The House ultimately passed the funding package 217-214, with 21 Democrats voting yes.

This is not a “refusal to fund” — it’s conditional funding pending reform negotiations following two fatal shootings of American citizens by federal agents.

Claim 3: “Democrats have been on a quest to defund ICE”

Verdict: MOSTLY FALSE

Historical legislation: The only “abolish ICE” bill was introduced in July 2018 by Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI). It had only 8 co-sponsors out of 193 House Democrats. When Republicans tried to force a vote, its own sponsors announced they would vote against it. Democratic leaders explicitly rejected abolishing ICE.

Current Democratic position: Democrats are seeking operational reforms, not defunding:

  • Requiring judicial warrants for entering homes
  • Banning masks and requiring body cameras
  • Ending roving immigration patrols
  • Establishing a uniform code of conduct

The Democratic appropriations proposal would cut ICE by $115 million out of approximately $10 billion — keeping funding essentially flat.

More importantly: ICE already received $75 billion over four years through the Republican reconciliation bill passed in July 2025. Immigration enforcement would continue regardless of this appropriations dispute.

Public polling: 84% support body cameras for immigration agents; 69% support judicial warrants for home entry.

Claim 4: Tensions in Minnesota followed “defund ICE” push

Verdict: CAUSALLY REVERSED

The timeline shows the Minneapolis shootings caused the funding dispute, not the other way around:

DateEvent
December 4, 2025DHS announces Operation Metro Surge targeting Minneapolis
December 22, 2025ICE shoots Cuban immigrant in St. Paul
January 7, 2026Renee Nicole Good killed by ICE agent
January 12, 2026Minnesota AG sues DHS; federal prosecutors resign
January 22, 2026House passes DHS funding bill
January 23, 2026Minnesota general strike
January 24, 2026Alex Jeffrey Pretti killed by CBP agents
January 28, 2026Federal judge finds ICE violated 96+ court orders
January 29, 2026Democrats block DHS funding bill
January 31, 2026Shutdown begins

The “defund ICE” push was a response to the Minneapolis shootings, not a precursor. Before the shootings, government funding was reportedly on a “glide path” to passage.

What Actually Caused the Shutdown

January 7, 2026: ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother who had just dropped her son at school.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey stated: “Having seen the video myself, I want to tell everybody directly that is bullshit” — referring to DHS claims she tried to run over agents.

January 24, 2026: CBP agents shot and killed Alex Jeffrey Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse at the Minneapolis VA hospital, while he was filming enforcement activities.

Internal CBP documents reviewed by NPR contradicted DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s claims that he was a “domestic terrorist.”

The “Bipartisan Deal” Context

Langworthy says “we have the framework for a bipartisan deal.”

What the deal actually covered:

  • Bipartisan passage of five appropriations bills for full year
  • DHS separated for two weeks of negotiations
  • Senate passed the compromise 71-29

What it does NOT include: Agreement on the ICE reforms that are the actual sticking point.

Senator John Thune (R-SD): Reaching a deal by February 13 is “an impossibility.”

Senator John Kennedy (R-LA): Negotiations would be “about as productive and efficient as an eighth grade car wash.”

Summary Table

ClaimVerdict
“I have always been opposed to shutdowns”CORRECTION — prior FALSE rating withdrawn; the December 2024 record shows YEA votes on both CRs (see correction note)
Democrats “refused to fund” DHSMISLEADING — accepted temporary funding pending reforms
Democrats want to “defund ICE”MOSTLY FALSE — seeking reforms; ICE has $75B already
Tensions rose in Minnesota after “defund” pushCAUSALLY REVERSED — shootings caused the dispute
“Bipartisan deal framework exists”TRUE but INCOMPLETE — procedural only, not on reforms

Questions This Raises

  1. Does accepting a 2-week CR while funding five other agencies constitute “refusing to fund” DHS?
  2. If ICE already has $75 billion from reconciliation, is the current appropriations dispute really about “defunding”?
  3. Should the video evidence contradicting DHS claims about Renee Good inform how we evaluate the dispute?

Sources

Note: This entry documents publicly available information from congressional records and news coverage. Readers may draw their own conclusions.

Last updated: June 15, 2026 (corrected)