US Government Shutdown Update 2026: Partial Shutdown Continues as DHS and ICE Funding Fight Drives Senate–House Standoff

A partial U.S. government shutdown is underway in early February 2026, and as of Monday, February 2, 2026 ET, the federal government has not fully reopened. The lapse began after a funding deadline passed over the weekend, leaving some agencies without appropriations while most operations continue under funding that lawmakers advanced separately.

The immediate question behind the surge in “is the government shut down” searches is simple: yes, but not across the entire government. The more important question is how quickly Congress can pass a final package that includes the Department of Homeland Security, which has become the central pressure point in this round of negotiations.

Is the Government Shut Down Today? What’s Actually Closed in a Partial Shutdown

A partial shutdown typically means some federal functions keep running while others pause or operate in a limited way. Essential services continue, but many routine, public-facing services can slow down. The scope depends on which funding bills lapsed and how each department executes shutdown plans.

In this episode, the biggest driver is Homeland Security funding, including immigration enforcement accounts. Lawmakers have been trying to move forward with funding for most of the government while isolating Homeland Security into a shorter extension or a separate track. That approach reduces the immediate blast radius, but it also creates a single, high-leverage choke point where a stalemate can still trigger a shutdown.

Senate Democrats, DHS, and ICE Funding: Why This Shutdown Fight Is Different

The political fuel here is not a broad disagreement over spending levels alone. It is a dispute over immigration enforcement practices and oversight tied to a fatal incident during an operation in Minneapolis in recent days. Democrats have sought added guardrails and accountability measures for immigration enforcement, while Republicans argue those demands could restrict operations or create security risks for agents.

That dynamic has turned Homeland Security into the bargaining chip. Senate Democrats have signaled they are willing to withhold support for fast-tracking a House vote unless there is a more open process or policy changes. House Republican leadership, facing a narrow margin, has limited room to lose votes and often needs a procedural path that either attracts bipartisan support or keeps near-unanimous backing within its own conference.

This is why the shutdown question can change quickly from “did it happen” to “will it end today.” The legislative math is tight, and the procedural steps matter as much as the policy.

Mike Johnson, the House, and the Reopening Path: What to Watch on February 2–3 ET

House leadership has indicated it expects the shutdown to be short, with attention focused on the first full week of February. The key issue is timing and procedure: even if there is agreement on the broad outline, the House still has to move a bill through the steps required for passage. If the House changes the Senate-passed language, the Senate may need another vote.

As of Monday, the practical reopening path is:

• The House takes up a package that funds most agencies and addresses Homeland Security on a short-term extension or negotiated terms.

• If it passes without changes, it can go to the president.

• If it changes, it returns to the Senate, raising the risk of delay.

Behind the Headline: Incentives, Stakeholders, and the Leverage Game

Context: The fight sits at the intersection of a funding deadline and a politically charged immigration enforcement debate. A recent Minneapolis operation created a new focal point for oversight demands, and the funding deadline gave those demands immediate leverage.

Incentives:

• Democrats want visible concessions on accountability and operational rules, especially after a lethal incident that has intensified scrutiny.

• Republicans want to avoid setting a precedent that policy changes are extracted through shutdown deadlines, and they also want to protect enforcement flexibility.

• Leadership in both chambers wants to minimize the duration of the shutdown to reduce public backlash, but each side also wants to avoid looking like it caved.

Stakeholders:

• Federal workers and contractors in affected agencies, who face delayed pay or interruptions.

• Travelers and the general public, who may see slower processing in some services.

• Immigration enforcement personnel and communities affected by enforcement, for whom the policy terms matter directly.

• Congressional leaders and the White House, for whom blame assignment can shape the next negotiation.

What We Still Don’t Know

Several missing pieces will determine whether “shutdown 2026” becomes a brief disruption or a longer standoff:

• Whether negotiators can agree on specific oversight measures tied to immigration enforcement without splitting each party’s coalition.

• Whether the House can pass the package quickly under a fast-track procedure, or whether it must use a slower process that invites amendments and delays.

• Whether any new developments in the Minneapolis incident change the political calculus inside the Democratic caucus or among swing-district Republicans.

What Happens Next: 5 Realistic Scenarios and Their Triggers

1. Quick resolution by Tuesday, February 3 ET
   Trigger: House passes the Senate-aligned package with minimal changes.

2. Short extension for Homeland Security, broader funding restored
   Trigger: Leaders agree to a temporary Homeland Security stopgap while continuing talks on enforcement rules.

3. Longer partial shutdown driven by procedure, not policy
   Trigger: The House alters the bill and the Senate schedule slips, extending the lapse even if a deal exists in principle.

4. Deal collapses over enforcement-related conditions
   Trigger: One side rejects guardrails as too restrictive or rejects the lack of guardrails as unacceptable, and internal caucus pressure hardens positions.

5. A compromise with targeted oversight and delayed implementation
   Trigger: A narrower set of accountability steps wins enough votes now, with a structured review or rulemaking process later.

Why it matters: Even a short shutdown disrupts routine government services and raises uncertainty for workers and the public. But the larger impact is strategic: if immigration enforcement policy becomes the recurring hinge on which funding turns, future deadlines may become more volatile, with each side increasingly willing to risk disruption to force concessions.