Is ICE following rules for ID'ing itself in migrant arrests?
Democrats are pushing legislation that would require federal immigration officers to identify themselves properly and to operate without their faces covered. Lawmakers claim ICE's tactics 'endanger public safety by creating confusion, fear and mistrust' in communities migrant advocates say have been terrorized by threats of arrests and deportation.
Department of Homeland Security officials insist officers and agents are acting properly despite significantly rising cases of ICE officers being assaulted. But the Trump administration's insistence that ICE put 3,000 migrants in custody per day is putting officers in a very dangerous position, a former ICE official told NewsNation.
'The eye is off the ball for public safety, and it's about the quota,' Jason Houser, the agency's chief of staff between 2021-23, said. 'The ICE officer is now the sword of the political class in the White House.'
According to the Code of Federal Regulations, federal immigration officers are required to identify themselves 'as soon as it is practical and safe to do so'.
The rules stipulate that officers are required to inform a person that they are being arrested and for what reason. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 requires federal officers responding to a civil disturbance to visibly display identifying information of the officer and the agency they represent unless they are working under cover.
But some insist that's not happening, including Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who said federal officers are 'pulling people off the street' with their faces covered and dressed in civilian clothing. Booker and Sen. Alex Padilla are among the lawmakers to introduce bills that would force ICE officers to show their faces.
Houser said that by officers attempting to arrest migrants while dressed in hoodies and other non-identifiable items, officers put themselves and colleagues from other federal immigration agencies at risk.
ICE is leaving how officers dress to the discretion of individual field offices, which is creating confusion among the general public, Houser said. Houser said ICE and other federal immigration enforcement agencies often act outside the bounds of other law enforcement organizations.
'There is no policy, there is no stance, there is no procedure for what they are doing,' Houser said, adding, 'Nobody conforms in this way and acts in this manner.'
However, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin argued in a statement to NewsNation that federal immigration agents and officers 'clearly identify themselves as law enforcement' despite needing to protect themselves from 'highly sophisticated gangs' by covering their faces.
ICE Director Todd Lyons told NewsNation that officers rarely wore masks before President Donald Trump took office in January. However, citing rising attacks being reported on federal immigration officers who also face doxing threats, some officers have been forced to mask their identities.
'They don't want to wear those masks, but it's for their own safety,' Lyons said. 'If I could figure out a way that we could do it and they could do their job safely, I would love to sit down with lawmakers and come up with some solution to that. But until I can assure the men and women of ICE and their families are going to be protected, I'm going to let them do whatever they need to do to protect themselves.'
However, Houser said that by covering their faces, federal officers are creating confusion about whether they are true federal employees or part of a growing number of people who have been accused of impersonating federal officers. Other complaints include that federal officers are using unmarked cars as part of their operations.
While acknowledging that some DHS officers are working undercover, a spokesperson for the agency told NewsNation that some of the claims being made against DHS are 'getting a little desperate.'
In June, Huntington Park, Calif., police arrested a man who had previously been arrested on human smuggling charges. Police alleged that he had a loaded gun, passports and materials purporting him to be a federal immigration officer in a vehicle that was parked in a handicapped spot.
The city's mayor, Arturo Flores, said that the incident highlighted the fear that exists among a largely immigrant population due to the uncertainty of whether people claiming to be federal officers actually work for immigration agencies.
'Masked agents, unmarked vehicles and refusal to identify yourself is not the image of a just and lawful government – it is the image of fear,' Flores said.
Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., has accused ICE of inflaming tensions by allowing officers to cover their faces.
'If they are standing on lawfulness, they shouldn't be afraid to show their faces,' Swalwell said on 'CUOMO'. 'No other law enforcement agency operates routinely the way that they're doing, and it's terrorizing people.'
The California arrest came weeks before DHS officers recently refused to identify themselves in Chicago, where 10-15 vehicles pulled up to the National Museum of Puerto Rican Art & Culture and remained for nearly two hours.
Museum workers said federal officers refused to show identification or inform employees why they were there. DHS said the visit was not immigration-related and was instead connected to a narcotics investigation being conducted by a Homeland Security Investigations financial task force.
'Why didn't (officers) say that before, and why didn't (they) identify yourselves to the folks there so they didn't have to sound the alarm that this type of activity was occurring?' Chicago Ald. Gil Villegas told NewsNation. 'Had they said that, it would have never escalated.'
While Democrats of migrant advocates push for more federal transparency, Houser puts much of the blame for how ICE officers are being treated squarely on the White House, citing calls by Border Czar Tom Homan and others for the number of migrant arrests to continue by whatever means necessary. He said as long as those directives remain in place, federal officers will remain under a difficult spotlight.
Homan said that while many are complaining about the 3,000 daily arrest figure, calculations would require federal officers to make 7,000 arrests per day to capture the migrants that Homan said former President Joe Biden allowed into the country.
'When you have quotas on arrests and you're now targeting non-criminal working migrants, this is what happens,' Houser told NewsNation. 'ICE agents are put at risk, where they're personally going to be targeted because of a really bad policy.'
NewsNation's Ali Bradley contributed reporting to this story
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Democrats can rebuild government by learning from how Trump has destroyed it
We know the tragic effects of President Trump's dismantling of the federal government. Social Security service delivery are in crisis. Calls to the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the wake of disaster go unanswered. Rural hospitals brace for a loss of federal support. And now congressional Republicans are surrendering the power of the purse to further hobble core government services by choking off funding. But the truth is, Trump alone didn't break the federal government. He is putting the devastating capstone on a decades-long conservative project of undermining its capacity to function: underfunding agencies, outsourcing expertise, layering on procedural hurdles, stacking courts with partisan allies, and eroding public trust. Long before Trump took office, the result was a government that couldn't move quickly, deliver boldly or meet the needs of the people it was supposed to serve. And when the government is unable to visibly respond to people's discontent and aspirations within the timeframe of an electoral mandate, the legitimacy of democracy itself erodes. If Democrats truly believe in the power of government to improve people's lives, they should be cautious about reverting to pre-Trump institutions. Our time in the Biden-Harris administration taught us that the federal government wasn't meeting the needs of middle- or working-class people long before the 2024 election. What was left of it has now been intentionally sabotaged. If we want to implement a bold policy agenda in the future — one that truly creates agency, power and opportunity for people who don't have it — we have to start planning now to build the basic infrastructure for a government that's much more responsive to and resonant with ordinary Americans, not the monied few. For too long, Democrats have been stuck in a vicious cycle of playing catch-up in a game with existential stakes. Phase one: Republicans dismantle government programs and services and trigger economic crises through their laissez-faire approach to governance. Phase two: Democrats retake power, and then scramble to steer a hobbled system back to the status quo. Phase three: Democrats fail to deliver the visible change the electorate craves, Republicans retake power, and the cycle repeats. What has to change? We need to confront a hard truth: Despite good intentions and tireless efforts from appointees and civil servants alike, the old tools and norms have not worked. Administrative rulemaking has been too slow, fragile, and captured by well-resourced industries to meaningfully serve the public interest. Major policies passed with fanfare took four or more years to show results — long after voters were asked to judge them. Meanwhile, activist courts stacked by the right delayed or dismantled even modest reforms. Agencies were afraid to antagonize the powerful industries they were supposed to oversee, or to take an investment risk and face public failure. Enforcement against corporate lawbreaking was underfunded and slow. Outsourcing of core government functions made private contractors rich even when their performance was shoddy. And far too often, the government was a distant, impenetrable behemoth that piled paperwork on Americans, instead of proactively listening to them to understand their needs and deliver frictionless services in response. We can't win back faith in government with policies that are invisible, delayed or drowned in process. We need a new playbook — one that matches the urgency of the moment and the acuteness of people's needs. One that learns, paradoxically, from the relentlessness of Trump and his allies. What they've demonstrated is that the rules and norms constraining government action aren't fixed laws of nature. They're conventions — and they can be changed. If there's no political cost for ignoring them in the service of corporate power and oligarchic corruption, there should be even less fear about changing them to make government work better for ordinary people. Democrats should take the lesson: Flip the risk profile. Go big or go home. That means reorganizing policymaking around speed, visibility and political resonance. It means building teams around outcome-driven missions — not statutes, institutional bias or risk-averse compliance. It means treating economic, legal, outreach and communications strategy as one integrated campaign, and working much more collaboratively with our state and local government partners and community-based organizations. It means starting work long before Day One with the understanding that we will need to simultaneously build and deliver: pre-drafting policies, mapping authorities, recruiting top-flight talent and identifying the signature priorities for each agency that will show up in people's lives within a single term. These are unified campaign-style operations, not bureaucratic ones. And it means breaking free from the norms that keep the government mired in caution. Abolish or radically retool obsolete veto gates, such as the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Limit judicial meddling in economic policy choices made by political leaders accountable to the people, and refocus courts on protecting individual liberties. Make the government great to work for again, and repopulate it with technologists, statisticians, product managers, service designers, community organizers and movement lawyers. Clean out the procedural clutter that saps time and bandwidth. We've seen what gets in the way. Now it's time to start clearing it. Importantly, when we act, we must act boldly. During the last administration, the types of policies that resonated were the big, simple, universal ones: a cap on insulin prices, a ban on junk fees, an end to noncompetes, a free, easy way to file your taxes. These were policies designed to be tangible, memorable and swift — and they addressed economic frustrations that transcend partisan lines. That's not just good economics. It's good politics. It's good democracy. Policies must provide proof that the government can still work for ordinary people, not just large corporations or insiders. For too long, Democrats have tried to govern within a framework designed to thwart them and to protect entrenched interests. Trump simply ignored it. If we want to change that trajectory for government, we need to be just as fearless and bold in building a new framework as Republicans have been in destroying the old one. If Democrats want to lead, the party must demonstrate that the government can — and will — continue to change lives for the better. Let's stop trying to tinker with a broken machine. Let's start building one that actually works.
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Trump reacts to Tulsi Gabbard reveal: ‘Irrefutable proof of Obama coup'
President Donald Trump is furious with former President Barack Obama, whom he is accusing of participating in a 'coup' against him in 2016. Trump is referring of course to recent disclosures from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who has released documents showing it was Obama who encouraged intelligence officials to reach stronger conclusions about Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 election. According to Gabbard, the intelligence community was well aware that Russia did not hack voting machines, nor did the country have much impact on the outcome, but Trump's enemies in the Democratic Party wanted to paint him as a Russian collaborator, and so they overreached. The media, of course, followed suit, publishing headline after headline suggesting that Trump was a Russian stooge. Here is President Trump reacting to the latest news: 'We found absolute — this isn't like evidence, this is like proof, irrefutable proof, that Obama was seditious. That Obama was trying to lead a coup. And it was with Hillary Clinton and with all these other people, but Obama headed it up. And, you know, I get a kick when I hear everyone talks about people I never even heard of. […] It was Obama, he headed it up. And it says so right in the papers.' These allegations are extremely serious. Now, it's far too premature to throw around the word treason; in fact, I don't like when anybody, Democrat or Republican, starts accusing their opponents of treason. This reads less like treason to me and more like political weaponization of national intelligence for partisan purposes, which has become a recurring theme. Make no mistake: There was an effort to de-legitimize Trump's election to the presidency, and the argument was made by mainstream media mouthpieces leveraging the expertise of deep-state spymasters. Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter both said that Trump was an illegitimate president, in response to media reporting on Russia's meddling. This was the original 'stolen election' theory, and it's only been overshadowed because Trump's false contention that the 2016 election was stolen has subsequently received much more media coverage and much more vigorous pushback. Let me be perfectly clear: Trump should have never claimed that the 2020 election was stolen from him. But he's in good company: Look at the Democrats who said the same thing about 2016! And their main theory backing that up was Russian malfeasance — something intelligence officials privately discounted, until they went to the White House and had a chat with outgoing President Barack Obama.
USA Today
a few seconds ago
- USA Today
Alina Habba politicized her job as US attorney. Team Trump politicizes her exit.
Alina Habba has no business being a federal prosecutor. That didn't stop the Trump administration from trying to make it happen. President Donald Trump and the crew of cynical sycophants surrounding him can seem pretty unpredictable until you start spotting the patterns. On matters of law and order, expect the inversion of what Trump claims to be true. If he says he's ending the "weaponization" of the Department of Justice, you better believe he'll use that legal power like a blunt instrument to pound away at his perceived enemies, no matter what the law allows, no matter how inept his agents are. That's why the kerfuffle about Trump's pick for U.S. attorney for New Jersey, Alina Habba, feels so predictable. Habba was widely seen as inexperienced when she represented Trump in a 2024 New York defamation case, which he lost. But she played the part of a lawyer in a passable way while lavishing Trump with loyalty on Fox News so, of course, he made her the top prosecutor for the entire state of New Jersey. And, of course, she made a mess of it, politicizing the office from the get-go in a set of fits-and-starts prosecutions against Democrats in the state who are critical of Trump's deport-them-all approach to immigration. But Habba faced two roadblocks that Trump and her DOJ cheerleaders, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, couldn't push her past. Alina Habba was clearly not experienced enough for US attorney job Federal prosecutors are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. And Senate protocol gives the two senators from any state significant yay-or-nay say over those picks. Cory Booker and Andy Kim, the two Democratic senators from New Jersey, jointly announced on July 2 that Habba "in her short tenure as interim U.S. Attorney ... has degraded the office and pursued frivolous and politically motivated prosecutions." So, that was a nay from them. Habba had another chance. The federal judges of the District of New Jersey could have voted to keep her on the job, past the 120-day limit of her interim capacity as U.S. attorney. That deadline expired July 22. But the judges also said nay to Habba. Opinion: Gabbard yells 'Russia hoax' to distract MAGA from Epstein for Trump. It won't last. In an order at the deadline, Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb named an experienced prosecutor who had been serving as New Jersey's first deputy U.S. attorney, Desiree Leigh Grace, as Habba's replacement, effective the same day. What came next was as predictable as the rest of it. Trump's MAGA administration wasted no time attacking the courts Bondi and Blanche accused the judges of playing politics because they would not rubber-stamp Habba, who was so clearly playing politics with her role. And Bondi removed Grace from the job she had just been given, whining that "rogue judges" had impeded Trump's presidential power. So an experienced prosecutor got bounced from the job that Habba just got bounced from for being inexperienced and using the job like a political activist. Experience is really a red flag to a crew trying to invert the meaning of justice. Grace's removal injected yet more chaos into the office of a federal prosecutor, which had already been a mess under Habba. Booker and Kim, in a joint statement on July 22, pointed to a pattern of Trump's DOJ attacking judges and the rule of law. "The firing of a career public servant, lawfully appointed by the court, is another blatant attempt to intimidate anyone that doesn't agree with them and undermine judicial independence," Booker and Kim said. Opinion: MAGA is coming for Trump over lost Epstein files. Bondi may pay the price. Here's what comes next: Habba will play the victim, with Bondi and Blanche sobbing along. Then Trump will sneer about "activist judges," a favorite villain in the trite emails he sends out all the time, pleading with his supporters to give him money. And then Trump will find another spot for her, probably at the DOJ, definitely not in a post where the Senate has to weigh her qualifications. That part's not too difficult to predict, because we've already seen it. Habba isn't the only Trump loyalist to secure a position in this administration Trump picked Ed Martin, a devoted supporter with scant legal background and zero experience as a prosecutor, to be the interim U.S. attorney for Washington, DC, on Jan. 20, right after the inauguration. Martin got right to work on Trump's inversion of justice, serving as one of the early inquisitors of how federal agents and prosecutors investigated the rioters who invaded and ransacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as Trump refused to admit that he had lost the 2020 presidential election. Opinion: Donald Trump's Jan. 6 pardons cast a long shadow over justice six months later Martin's nomination stalled in the Senate in May and, facing the same 120-day deadline problem as Habba, Trump had to hand the gig off instead to one of his most fervent Fox News supporters, Jeanine Pirro. Martin wasn't sent packing. He landed another DOJ gig in the new Weaponization Working Group, which Bondi claims was set up to stop the politicization of the agency. But, remember, inversion is always at play here. So Bondi, with Trump's blessing, is really using the group to weaponize justice as a tool for political power. If Habba travels the same route, and that does seem likely, she'll finally be in a post she's qualified for ‒ using the levers of power at DOJ to punish anyone Trump feels is out of line. See her potential job description this way: Think of what an experienced, professional, principled lawyer would do ‒ and then wait for her to invert that expectation. Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.
