January 2026 Demands on Federal Opening

General Discussion
1

flag
flag1008Ă—1792 688 KB

We are soon headed for a shutdown of the federal government. Here is what we need for it to re-open.

SHUTDOWN DEMANDS
Compliance, Transparency, and Rule of Law Conditions for FY2026 Funding

Purpose
Congress cannot appropriate funds to executive agencies that are in documented defiance of federal courts, statutory disclosure mandates, or constitutional protections. These demands establish compliance-first conditions required to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

These conditions are not abolitionist, not partisan, and not discretionary. They are the minimum requirements for lawful governance.

I. Court Compliance & Use-of-Force Accountability (ICE / DHS)

Condition 1 — Identification & Mask Restrictions
No funds may be used for interior enforcement operations unless all participating personnel:

Display visible, unique, agency-issued identification numbers, and

Keep faces uncovered during operations,
except where an individualized, written threat assessment—approved by a supervising official—documents a specific safety risk.

Rationale: Anonymous armed enforcement undermines accountability, violates democratic norms, and obstructs judicial review.

Condition 2 — Body-Worn Camera (BWC) Exclusivity
No funds may be used for enforcement activities unless:

Body-worn cameras are activated for the full duration of encounters, and

BWC footage constitutes the primary evidentiary record.

Use of auxiliary or secondary recording devices may not override, replace, or selectively substitute for BWC footage.
Intentional non-activation or obstruction creates a rebuttable presumption of policy violation.

Condition 3 — Rapid Upload & Preservation
All BWC footage from enforcement encounters must be uploaded within 24 hours to a secure, write-once federal repository.

Access tiers:

Immediate access for courts and Inspectors General

Logged, read-only access for congressional oversight staff

Public release subject to lawful redaction timelines

Rationale: Delayed or selective evidence handling enables impunity and contempt of court.

Condition 4 — Court Order Compliance Trigger
Any documented violation of a Temporary Restraining Order or injunction:

Automatically triggers a funding holdback

Requires sworn compliance certifications from responsible supervisors

Mandates corrective action plans subject to Inspector General review

II. DOJ Statutory Compliance — Epstein Files Transparency Act

Condition 5 — Mandatory Production Schedule
No funds may be used by DOJ unless it complies with the Epstein Files Transparency Act by:

Publishing all required materials on a fixed, court-reviewable schedule

Providing Congress an unredacted list of named government officials and politically exposed persons, as required by law

1 Like
2

Condition 6 — Independent Oversight Mechanism
Failure to meet statutory deadlines automatically triggers:

Appointment of a court-approved Special Master or Independent Monitor

Mandatory evidence preservation orders

Monthly public compliance reporting

Rationale: A disclosure statute without enforcement is a nullity.

III. Whistleblower & Victim Protection Infrastructure

Condition 7 — Independent Intake & Protection Office
Congress shall fund an independent Whistleblower and Victim Intake Office, operating outside DOJ operational control, to receive:

Evidence of federal law-enforcement misconduct

Complaints of sexual exploitation, trafficking, or obstruction

Retaliation reports

All submissions trigger automatic evidence preservation.

Condition 8 — Anti-Retaliation Funding Firewall
No funds may be used to discipline, transfer, surveil, or investigate a complainant absent Inspector General approval.

IV. Enforcement & Funding Mechanism

A defined percentage of DHS / ICE operational funding shall be withheld until all conditions above are certified as operational by the Inspector General.

False or misleading certifications shall be referred for judicial review.

Closing Principle

Congress may disagree on policy. It may not fund contempt of court, statutory defiance, or anonymous force.

These conditions are the constitutional minimum.

3

#2 — APPROPRIATIONS RIDER TEXT
DHS / ICE / DOJ Compliance, Transparency, and Accountability Conditions

(FY2026 or Continuing Resolution)

TITLE I — DEFINITIONS

Sec. 101. Definitions.
For purposes of this Act:

“Interior enforcement operation” means any civil or administrative enforcement action conducted by the Department of Homeland Security within the interior of the United States, excluding ports of entry.

“Body-worn camera” (BWC) means an agency-issued audiovisual recording device worn on the person of a law-enforcement officer.

“Covered personnel” means any employee, officer, contractor, or task-force participant engaged in an interior enforcement operation.

“Secure federal repository” means a write-once, tamper-resistant digital storage system maintained by or on behalf of the federal government.

“Inspector General” means the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security or Department of Justice, as applicable.

TITLE II — IDENTITY, TRACEABILITY, AND USE-OF-FORCE CONDITIONS

(DHS / ICE)

Sec. 201. Visible Identification Requirement.

(a) Funding Limitation.
None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for interior enforcement operations unless all covered personnel:

Display clearly visible, unique, agency-issued identification numbers; and

Maintain uncovered faces during enforcement encounters.

(b) Exception.
Subsection (a)(2) shall not apply where an individualized, written threat assessment—approved in advance by a supervising official—documents a specific, articulable risk to the safety of the covered personnel.

(c) Recordkeeping.
All threat assessments under subsection (b) shall be retained and made available to the Inspector General and any court of competent jurisdiction upon request.

Sec. 202. Body-Worn Camera Activation and Evidentiary Priority.

(a) Mandatory Activation.
No funds may be used for an interior enforcement operation unless all covered personnel utilize activated body-worn cameras for the duration of the encounter.

(b) Evidentiary Priority.
Body-worn camera footage shall constitute the primary evidentiary record of any enforcement encounter.

(c) Auxiliary Devices.
The use of auxiliary, secondary, or personal recording devices may not substitute for, override, or selectively replace body-worn camera footage.

(d) Presumption of Violation.
Intentional failure to activate, obstruction, or interference with a body-worn camera creates a rebuttable presumption of policy violation.

1 Like
4

Sec. 203. Rapid Upload, Preservation, and Access.

(a) Upload Requirement.
All body-worn camera footage from an interior enforcement operation shall be uploaded to a secure federal repository not later than 24 hours after the conclusion of the encounter.

(b) Preservation.
Such footage shall be preserved for a minimum period of 5 years, or longer if subject to litigation, investigation, or court order.

(c) Access.
The repository shall provide:

Immediate access to Inspectors General and courts;

Logged, read-only access to authorized congressional oversight staff;

Public release subject to lawful redaction timelines.

Sec. 204. Use-of-Force Presumption.

(a) Presumptive Violation.
Any use of chemical agents, flash-bang devices, kinetic projectiles, or physical force against observers, journalists, or non-resisting individuals shall be presumed a policy violation unless contemporaneous body-worn camera footage demonstrates an imminent threat of serious bodily harm.

Sec. 205. Court Order Compliance Trigger.

(a) Automatic Funding Holdback.
Upon a documented violation of a Temporary Restraining Order or injunction issued by a federal court relating to interior enforcement operations:

A percentage of operational funds, as determined by the Committees on Appropriations, shall be withheld;

The responsible supervisory officials shall submit sworn compliance certifications;

A corrective action plan shall be filed with the Inspector General.

(b) Certification Condition.
Withheld funds may not be released until the Inspector General certifies compliance.

TITLE III — DOJ STATUTORY COMPLIANCE

(Epstein Files Transparency Act)

Sec. 301. Mandatory Production Condition.

(a) Funding Limitation.
None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Department of Justice unless the Department complies with all disclosure requirements of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

(b) Schedule.
Required materials shall be published pursuant to a fixed production schedule subject to judicial review.

(c) Unredacted Congressional Disclosure.
The Department shall provide the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate an unredacted list of all government officials and politically exposed persons named in such files, as required by law.

Sec. 302. Independent Oversight Trigger.

(a) Failure to Comply.
Failure to meet statutory disclosure deadlines shall automatically trigger:

Appointment of a court-approved Special Master or Independent Monitor;

Mandatory evidence preservation orders;

Monthly public compliance reporting.

1 Like
5

TITLE IV — WHISTLEBLOWER AND VICTIM PROTECTION INFRASTRUCTURE
Sec. 401. Independent Intake Office.

(a) Establishment.
There is established an independent Whistleblower and Victim Intake Office, operating outside DOJ operational control.

(b) Scope.
The Office shall receive submissions relating to:

Federal law-enforcement misconduct;

Sexual exploitation, trafficking, or abuse;

Obstruction of justice or evidence suppression;

Retaliation against complainants.

(c) Preservation.
All submissions shall trigger automatic evidence preservation requirements.

Sec. 402. Anti-Retaliation Funding Firewall.

None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to discipline, transfer, surveil, or investigate a complainant absent prior approval of the Inspector General.

TITLE V — ENFORCEMENT AND CERTIFICATION
Sec. 501. Certification Requirement.

(a) Condition Precedent.
Release of withheld funds under this Act shall be contingent upon written certification by the applicable Inspector General that compliance mechanisms are operational.

(b) False Certification.
Any materially false certification shall be referred for judicial review.

Sec. 502. Rule of Construction.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit lawful enforcement activity conducted in compliance with the Constitution and federal law.

1 Like
6

Rhetoricians Kit

CIVIC COMPLIANCE BRIEFING PACKET
Funding the Rule of Law, Not Impunity

Audience: Members of Congress, committee staff, Inspectors General, judges, journalists
Purpose: Establish compliance-first conditions for funding DHS / ICE and DOJ

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1 page)

The United States is facing a constitutional compliance crisis, not a policy disagreement.

Multiple federal courts have issued injunctions and TROs restricting unlawful ICE enforcement tactics. Those orders have been documentedly violated. At the same time, the Department of Justice has failed to comply with a mandatory disclosure statute—the Epstein Files Transparency Act—passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.

Congress cannot fund agencies that:

defy federal courts,

conceal evidence,

or rely on anonymous force.

The solution is not abolition. (although I think that should no be taken of the table)
The solution is conditional funding tied to identity, evidence, time, and oversight.

This briefing proposes compliance-first appropriations conditions that:

restore accountability,

preserve lawful enforcement,

and protect constitutional legitimacy.

THE CORE PROBLEM

  1. Court Defiance

TROs and injunctions restrict excessive force, illegal searches, and attacks on observers.

Violations have been captured on video.

Courts are building contempt records.

  1. Identity Obfuscation

Widespread masking of federal agents.

Use of multiple, non-standard cameras.

Delayed or selective release of footage.

Result: No traceable accountability.

  1. Evidence Control Failure

Body-worn camera footage is not uploaded promptly.

Internal control of evidence enables selective narratives.

  1. DOJ Disclosure Failure

The Epstein Files Transparency Act mandates disclosure.

DOJ missed statutory deadlines.

Partial, heavily redacted releases undermine congressional authority.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE

Congress may debate policy.
It may not fund contempt of court or statutory defiance.

THE COMPLIANCE SOLUTION (SUMMARY)

Congress conditions funding on five non-negotiables:

Visible Identification
No anonymous armed enforcement.

Body-Worn Camera Primacy
One official record. No selective substitution.

Rapid Upload & Preservation
Evidence secured before narratives harden.

Automatic Funding Holdbacks for Court Violations
Compliance is not optional.

Independent Oversight for Epstein Disclosure
A transparency law must have teeth.

These conditions do not stop enforcement.
They stop lawless enforcement.

7

Points of Leverage

Courts gain enforceable records.

Inspectors General gain certification authority.

Appropriators gain leverage.

Moderates gain a rule-of-law rationale.

Public trust is restored without escalation.

This framework forces institutions to choose:

comply, or

lose funding and legitimacy.

WHAT THIS IS NOT

Not defunding law enforcement

Not open borders

Not street confrontation

Not partisan revenge

It is constitutional maintenance.

PUBLIC LANGUAGE KIT
Sound Bites, Slogans, and Short-Form Talking Points

Designed for 30–60 second clips, captions, headlines, and repetition.

CORE FRAME (repeatable)

“This isn’t about politics.
It’s about whether court orders still matter.”

SLOGANS — “Valor of Old” Energy

“No masks. No secrets. No exceptions.”

“If you can’t show your badge, you can’t use the badge.”

“Law enforcement must obey the law.”

“Courts issue orders. Congress controls funding.”

“Transparency isn’t radical. It’s constitutional.”

“Anonymous force is not American.”

“Evidence first. Excuses later.”

“Fund compliance, not contempt.”

SHORT-FORM VIDEO HOOKS (0–3 seconds)

“Why are federal agents hiding their faces?”

“What happens when courts are ignored?”

“If this were you, would the footage already be gone?”

“A law passed 427–1. Why isn’t it enforced?”

“Who benefits when evidence is delayed?”

15–30 SECOND TALKING POINTS
On ICE masking

“In America, armed government power has a face and a name.
Masks erase accountability.
If safety requires anonymity, the paperwork should prove it.”

On body cameras

“One encounter should have one official record.
Multiple cameras controlled by the agency are how truth gets edited.”

On court orders

“This isn’t about immigration policy.
It’s about whether federal agencies can ignore federal judges.”

On funding

“Congress doesn’t have to shut anything down.
It just has to stop paying for lawbreaking.”

On Epstein files

“A transparency law without enforcement is a suggestion.
Congress didn’t pass a suggestion.”

30–60 SECOND EXPLAINERS (scriptable)
Explainer 1 — The fulcrum

“Here’s the simple test of democracy:
Can the government use force anonymously and hide the evidence?
If the answer is no, then funding must require identification, cameras, and court compliance.”

Explainer 2 — Why this isn’t radical

“No one is banning enforcement.
We’re banning secrecy, delay, and defiance.
That’s not radical — that’s the Constitution.”

Explainer 3 — Why this matters beyond ICE

“If courts can be ignored here, they can be ignored anywhere.
That’s why this is a rule-of-law moment.”

JOURNALIST / EDITOR ANGLES

“When federal agencies defy judges, Congress has one tool left: the budget.”

“Masked enforcement and missing footage raise constitutional alarms.”

“A bipartisan transparency law hits a wall at DOJ.”

“Funding the rule of law vs. funding impunity.”

1 Like
8

STAFFERS — ONE-LINE JUSTIFICATION

“These riders protect Congress’s power of the purse and the judiciary’s authority without altering substantive enforcement law.”

FINAL CLOSING LINE (use everywhere)

“This is how a republic repairs itself:
identity, evidence, time, and accountability.”

1 Like
9

  • After the last [curtailed] shutdown, no one ever bothered to draft a bill to stop payment of congress people when there is a shutdown.

  • Will whoever offer to redirect their paychecks this time, if there is a shutdown?

Without either of those, there would be a hell of a lot of resentment from federal employees, right?

Do you see the Dems doing this?? Maybe they’ll surprise me, but given the inaction on the first point and no statement to date on the second…

Note/PS: A national strike+slowdown does not require the cooperation of a slew of corporate Dems…

Just thinking out loud: now would be a great time for a national strike; wouldn’t it? (link…)

1 Like
10

Excellent. It definitely addresses the constitutional crisis creep that Project 2025 has been doing. Way to keep it from having any triggering or inflammatory language.

Hard to say if the uniparty is up for it, but they need pushing towards something besides more of the same.

Great work

1 Like
11

I really hope they consider some of it. A detailed suggestion I suppose.

We should try to evolve, I am with you @over9000

Thanks!

12

I have some friends that do legal work, might get this put into legal format for people to present to their Reps and Senators asap so there can be forward motion.

1 Like
13

The notice on this is much too short for a national strike -but you’re getting warmer! (<joke>even if you’re in Minnesota right now in the middle of winter…</joke>)

1 Like
14

I hear discussion of a budget shutdown over ICE funding; I just want to reiterate: until there is a rule to pause congressional pay (or at least a serious effort to get one passed, or the Party leadership organizes congressional pay to be voluntarily reallocated to federal employees…), I don’t see that as a winner for the Dems. It will only serve to alienate most federal employees from the Dems. We all knew this shutdown was in play and nobody on the Dem side even brought forward legislation to do that (never mind if it would get passed; at least a headcount among the Dems would have shown whether they could walk the walk on another shutdown…) It doesn’t matter that the total congressional payroll is nothing compared to the wages of federal employees; not trying to offer anything and then proceeding with a shutdown will be a real bad look for the Dem Party.

A fallback is a National Strike+Slowdown, endorsed by the Dem Party.

In my opinion: ICE SHOULD be confined to doing Customs work and possibly transferring criminals from local police to them for deportation to their home country. Local police should have the discretion to turn over a criminal perpetrator to ICE. The Dems blew the immigration issue and gave Trump a toehold by not pushing for violent crime checks of refugees with home countries.

What a bunch of CHUDs the Trump grifters are not owning up to their hypocrisy on Kyle Rittenhouse. “It is not smart to bring a rifle to a protest…” Oh -you didn’t see a problem with that when Kyle did it, did you?! Cenk was right in his segment on this: the Repubs are all about gun rights for me (people who support the Repubs…), but not thee (those who don’t…)

15

I think this is the sort of thing that could work but doesn’t work well as point of negotiation. Perhaps they could suspend their own pay as a show of solidarity. Reforming their pay and benefits should be part of a greater reformation package.

I think the stance here is; Chuck Schumer must be replaced as senate minority leader. His leadership has been disappointing. He is clearly either incompetent or has hidden contempt for the American people. There is no confidence in his leadership for a year now.

I like the idea of not allowing them the digression to release suspects to the police. Although what you said is that they are criminals. That is the rub right. Are they? Not only is any criminality in question so is ICE’s capacity to maintain credibility, legitimacy, and preserve evidence. Also just moving back to “customs work” isn’t something that I see as any sort of ask. They would say they are doing customs work now.

Yeah Kyle was my first thought too. Although my second was do you think Republicans are capable of shame regarding hypocrisy? Their zeal to stand up to others within their party who lust for violence seems to grow. Although for me what matters more here isn’t anger over incongruency it is pushing for containing leaderships treacherous decisions.

16

I was saying: local police/the local-State courts should be turning over to ICE for deportation IF a crime has been committed and they have been found guilty.

17

Oh is see now, I thought you were making the opposite point.

Under normal circumstances perhaps. In 2025 30 people died while in ICE custody, or during ICE “law enforcement” operations. Considering that I vehemently disagree.

On August, 5th 2025 a person by the name of Chaofeng Ge was found dead hanging in a shower stall. His arms and legs were bound. ICE investigated and ruled his death a suicide.

18

Well, that calls for an AG investigation -which can happen in a post-impeachment, post-Trump world. I was talking about what to do if this horseshit ever gets cleaned up…

1 Like
19

Want to point out: if congressional pay were to get suspended, I imagine a few more Repubs would be into reining in ICE!

And STILL nobody has drafted this legislation and tried to bring it to a vote, to force congress members to indicate where they stand; and the band plays on, right?

20

I think that docking / suspending their pay is good in theory just it is flawed in practice. The wealthiest congress members will not be financially compelled by suspending their pay. The most corrupt congress members are likely to also be among the wealthiest.

Also several bills that were recently introduced that do exactly what you are supporting:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5891

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/3057/titles

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5637

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1973