Recent strategies from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to recruit Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel are causing concern among law enforcement veterans. With imagery likening their hiring campaign to military operations, the approach has significant implications for the perception of immigration enforcement and its execution across the country.
According to a report from the Washington Post, ICE’s recruitment initiative, described internally as a “wartime recruitment” strategy, aims to fill thousands of new positions with a budget of $100 million. By using images of bomber jets and armed agents, the campaign attempts to evoke a sense of urgency and national security. This message resonated particularly during a time when tensions between immigration agents and the public have reportedly escalated, leading to alarming incidents, including violent protests.
Oscar Hagelsieb, a retired official from Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), who has a record of supporting strict immigration enforcement, has raised alarms about how recruitment tactics may attract individuals unfit for civilian law enforcement. He stated, “This isn’t combat.” Hagelsieb believes that the aggressive imagery and rhetoric shift the focus from traditional law enforcement responsibilities to a militaristic presence that may not correspond with the realities of immigration work.
The recruitment campaign’s tone has not only changed but is at odds with the historical mission of agencies like ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). David Lapan, a retired Marine Corps officer who served as DHS press secretary, noted that “traditionally, Homeland Security… has recruited for law enforcement, not for military-style operations.” This new direction poses risks, particularly as Border Patrol and ICE operations begin to blend, potentially compromising their effectiveness and accountability.
While DHS has reported attracting over 12,000 new officers in a matter of months—doubling the workforce—there are growing concerns about training protocols. The agency has compressed the training timeline, reducing the original 16 weeks for new officers to a brief six to eight-week curriculum. Although DHS asserts that the changes will not diminish training quality, the rapid pace raises serious questions about preparedness, especially following disturbing incidents that have included fatalities during enforcement actions.
The recruiting effort coincides with heightened incidents of violence directed at immigration officials. Reports indicate that assaults on immigration agents surged by over 1,300% last year, alongside rising threats and doxxing of personnel. As explained by DHS, this environment prompted the shift in recruiting messages, emphasizing the need for agents able to handle hostility. Such a response may further entrench a military mindset, which contrasts sharply with the demands of community-focused policing.
Amid these contentious tactics, the tragic incidents involving ICE agents—including the fatal shooting of a U.S. citizen during an enforcement action—highlight the urgency of the discussion surrounding the role of federal agents in local communities. The backlash from these events has fueled a wider debate on the use of force and the effectiveness of current immigration enforcement practices.
As ICE continues to expand its ranks with personnel potentially driven by the aggressive messaging, the need for clarity regarding operational roles remains essential. With former ICE Director Tom Homan’s recent appointment to oversee federal enforcement strategies, questions linger over how these new tactics will affect local relations and the safety of both officers and community members.
Recruitment strategies conveying military-like urgency may galvanize some support for immigration enforcement but could also alienate large segments of the public who advocate for humane and measured approaches to immigration issues. Law enforcement agents require a focus that balances accountability with their community roles, rather than a recruitment message that equates their work with armed conflict.
As these developments unfold, the implications of integrating a “war-like” approach into civil enforcement will demand careful scrutiny and may well redefine the landscape of immigration policy and community relations in the years to come.
"*" indicates required fields
