It’s About DHS Policy, Not Personnel

Noem Heads for the Exit

On Thursday afternoon, President Trump announced his decision to fire current DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and nominate Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) in her place. This news comes after weeks of backlash over DHS’s operations in Minneapolis, accusations of financial misconduct, and a growing chorus of Republican lawmakers frustrated by Noem’s mishandling of FEMA funds. As of now, Senator Mullin is expected to face an easy path to confirmation, potentially taking over the role at the end of the month.

A key factor in Republicans’ irritation with Noem was her new DHS directive requiring her office to review all DHS grants and contracts exceeding $100,000 — a policy that led to millions of dollars in aid to disaster-stricken states being withheld. This issue came to a head at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s oversight hearing on Tuesday, where Senator Thom Tillis pressed Noem for answers about a months-long delay in FEMA funds for North Carolina; soon after the hearing, the funding for North Carolina was released.

There is a scapegoat aspect to Sec. Noem’s firing, though. Her actions largely reflected what she understood to be the wishes of the President. Thus, while Noem may be out of a job, the issues surrounding DHS remain. This reality shapes Democrats’ insistence that despite Noem’s firing, only changes in policy, not personnel, will result in passing an annual appropriations bill for DHS. 

In the coming weeks, Senator Markwayne Mullin is expected to move through the confirmation process to become the next DHS Secretary. Mullin will be pressed by Democrats to answer how his leadership will differ from Noem’s and, speaking for the Administration, whether it intends to provide any acknowledgement of Democrats’ demands for reforms to ICE and CBP or if it instead will double-down and deepen the chasm preventing an agreement to fund DHS.

Meanwhile, the supposed negotiations over shutdown language have been intermittent at best, with the White House only responding last Thursday to Democrats’ offer from February 16. Our understanding is the Administration continues to refuse applying any potential reforms – which they haven’t agreed to yet – to funding flowing from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, attempting to claim that such money is distinguishable from annual appropriations. Democrats reject this position out of hand, since both streams of money flow to the same agencies and the source of the funds is a distinction without a difference.