The Dictatorship

The many, many obstacles to hiring 10,000 ICE agents

Published

9 months ago

July 9, 2025

The many, many obstacles to hiring 10,000 ICE agents

The repercussions of the sprawling bill President Donald Trump signed into law last week will be felt for decades. Of immediate concern to many critics is approximately $170 billion the law gives to the Department of Homeland Securityincluding almost $30 billion to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, whose agents have been at the forefront of Trump’s aggressive mass deportation efforts.

While the original House version of the bill set a specific hiring target for ICE of at least 10,000 new agents, the final version signed into law simply gives ICE tens of billions of dollars for everything from an unspecified number of new officers to transporting deportees to IT upgrades. The White House is still saying it plans to hire 10,000 new officershowever, which would more than double the number of enforcement agents, and the “Big Beautiful Bill” gives him a lot of money to do so. But that may be harder than it looks.

In some ways ICE’s standards are already lower than other institutions, yet it still struggles to fill openings.

To begin with, ICE has historically struggled to fill open positions. When ICE tried to hire 10,000 more officers during the first Trump administration, a 2017 report by DHS’ inspector general found that a net increase of that size would require interviewing half a million people. The lift was even bigger for Customs and Border Protection, which would have needed to interview 750,000 to net just 5,000, or half as many.

Eight years later, it will most likely be even harder for ICE or other agencies to find new recruits. Since 2020, police departments at every level have struggled to recruit and retain officers; in fact, all public-sector agencies are finding it hard to hire people. And despite the surge in funding provided by the GOP megabill, the pay for ICE will most likely be fairly noncompetitive. The maximum base pay for federal law enforcement is $75,000 before regional cost-of-living adjustments. A current job posting for an “enforcement and removal operations” position posits a salary range of roughly $50,000 to $90,000. For comparison, the New York Police Department offers rookies a starting salary of just over $60,000, rising to over $125,000 in less than six years — and the department still can’t fill about 1,000 open positions.

Note, too, that ongoing protests against ICE are likely to make these logistical issues even bigger. People take jobs for both money and status. ICE already underpays compared with many (but not all) police departments; protests will serve only to further weaken the status of the job. Moreover, local police officers, unlike ICE agents, get to stay close to their homes and families and work for institutions that appear to be viewed more favorably than ICE. And these local departments still struggle to fill open positions.

ICE, of course, has several ways to address this logistical challenge — but all face logistical challenges of their own.

Perhaps the likeliest response to hiring problems will be for ICE to use the money to try to expand its 287(g) programwhich deputizes local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration laws. Such a move would not expand ICE’s actual headcount but simply reallocate how already-hired local police spend their time. That could alleviate ICE’s short-run logistical challenge, but it is also the option most vulnerable to local resistance. 287(g) laws require local governments to sign on, which means opponents can thwart them by targeting local leaders, not national ones. While it is true that about 300 local agencies have recently signed agreementsthat is a small fraction of the of 17,000 nationwide. And many states and localities already have either banned such agreements or limited the sorts of cooperation that’s possible, with more joining in.

The next most obvious move for ICE would be to lower hiring standards. This is obviously concerning, since that means the new hirees would be less competent and potentially more dangerous (think about who would be drawn to work for ICE right now, given its public profile). As CBP discovered after a similar hiring spree in the mid-2000s, this approach increases the risk of corruption and of hiring people looking to undermine an agency from within, including on behalf of drug cartels.

Note, also, that in some ways ICE’s standards are already lower than those of other institutions, yet it still struggles to fill openings. For example, ICE is exempted from a 2010 law mandating that CBP applicants pass polygraph tests — a law prompted by the problems caused by the previously mentioned hiring spree). It’s also not clear that current ICE officers would want to work alongside low-level recruits; the CBP union, for example, complained about the dangers of lowering hiring standards back in 2010.

Moreover, lowered standards are politically risky. People already don’t like ICE, and lower-quality recruits would raise the risk of violent overreactions that could hurt the agency’s reputation even more. Local police departments are already complainingpublicly, that ICE tactics are making their jobs harder.

It is also possible that ICE could turn to contractors to fill the gap. This would, unlike 287(g) programs, expand actual headcount — but only temporarily. Moreover, contractors appear to often cost perhaps as much as twice as much as federal direct hires, although the amount of money authorized by the bill makes this a less pressing issue. Relying on contractors would also introduce a real risk of overchargingwhich would burn through ICE’s budget more quickly, and if contractors get paid more than ICE agentsexpanding contracting would make it even harder to hire and retain permanent ICE agents.

A final concern is that perhaps ICE will try to recruit Proud Boys and other right-wing extremists. But that just raises the question of why these people haven’t already joined. ICE isn’t offering more, or at least much more, than it has over the years they’ve chosen not to join. One likely reason for this hesitancy is that many of them have safer, better-paying jobs. A quarter of convicted Jan. 6ers, for example, were business owners, and only about 5% were unemployed. It’s likely that many of these people would prefer to continue cheering ICE on from the sidelines.

The “big, beautiful bill” is obviously a boon to ICE. But the agency faces serious logistical challenges. Those challenges and the possible workarounds will both pose difficulties for those who favor the agency’s expansion and create opportunities for resistance by those who oppose it.

John PPs

John Pfaff is a professor of law at the Fordham University School of Law. He is the author of “Locked In: The True Causes of Mass Incarceration and How to Achieve Real Reform.”

The Dictatorship

White House addresses criticism Trump is AWOL during missing airman search

Published

12 hours ago

April 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

White House addresses criticism Trump is AWOL during missing airman search

Apr. 4, 2026, 7:48 PM EDT

The White House is pushing back against mounting criticism that President Donald Trump has not formally addressed the search for a missing American airman in Iran after the country shot down its first U.S. warplane since the raging conflict began.

The president has not made any public speeches or appearances regarding the search-and-rescue operation. His last public address was on Wednesday, when he gave a primetime speech in which he attempted to make a case for his war to the nation.

White House Communications Director Steven Cheung sought to quell questions from reporters and speculation swirling on social media by issuing a statement on X late Saturday afternoon. “There has never been a President who has worked harder for the American people than President Trump. On this Easter weekend, he has been working nonstop in the White House and Oval Office. God Bless him,” Cheung said.

Questions about Trump’s whereabouts came to a boil on Saturday as one freelance photographer who covers the White House sought to put a rest to a rash of guesswork — untethered to any evidence.

An hour later, Cheung issued his statement noting that Trump spent Saturday working at the White House.

MS NOW spotted a Marine sentry standing guard outside the West Wing a couple of times on Saturday, suggesting the president was working inside. Notably, Trump did not visit his golf club in Sterling, Virginia, outside Washington on Saturday as he usually does when he stays at the White House on weekends.

In an interview with NBC on FridayTrump said the downing of the U.S. F-15E fighter jet over Iran would not affect ongoing negotiations with the country. When asked by The Independent what he’d do if the pilot is harmed or captured by Iranians, Trump replied: “Well, I can’t comment on it because — we hope that’s not going to happen.”

But on Saturday, he issued a fresh threat to Iran on his 10-day deadline, which expires Monday, for the country to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“Time is running out – 48 hours before all Hell will reign down on them,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.

The president also posted about a “massive strike in Tehran” which allegedly killed “many of Iran’s Military Leaders,” though Trump did not provide additional details on the strike he cited. The White House did not respond to MS NOW’s inquiry on when the strike happened and whether any new military leaders were killed.

Emily Hung is an associate White House producer for MS NOW.

The Dictatorship

Trump’s latest island real estate venture: Alcatraz

Published

12 hours ago

April 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Apr. 4, 2026, 5:34 PM EDT

Like many Americans, President Donald Trump has become fixated on Alcatraz, the notorious, frequently fog-shrouded California island fortress in the San Francisco Bay.

But for Trump, the defunct prison is more than a pop-culture, literary and cinematic phenomenon reminiscent of an era when the federal government dealt with gangsters so dangerous they were jailed on a remote, maximum-security island. It’s an opportunity to build “a state-of-the-art secure prison facility.”

And the president wants to use at least $152 million worth of taxpayer dollars to turn the dilapidated facility — shuttered in 1963 because its remoteness made it too expensive to operate — into a functional federal prison.

The White House sent Congress an outline of Trump’s spending priorities for the upcoming fiscal year on Friday. In it was a $5 billion request for the Bureau of Prisons to renovate the country’s “crumbling detention facilities.” More than $150 million of that would be directed toward upholding “the president’s commitment to rebuild Alcatraz.”

The money would cover the first year of project costs, the White House said. But that number pales in comparison to the projected cost of fully restoring Alcatraz, which has not housed a prisoner since the early 1960s.

In its heyday, operations at Alcatraz cost three times more than the average federal prison, according to a 1959 report published by the General Services Administration that assessed the long-term viability of keeping the prison open. Jailing one inmate on the island cost $10 per day, compared to $3 in other prisons.

The prison was closed in the early 1960s because its remoteness and proximity to salt water corrosion ultimately made it too expensive to sustain. Everything from water to food and fuel had to be sent to the island by boat. The logistical challenges of holding inmates on the island long term won’t just disappear, critics argue.

California’s politicians have balked at Trump’s proposal, arguing it would erase an important part of American history and cut into San Francisco’s already struggling local economy. Alcatraz generates about $60 million in tourism revenue every year, according to the National Park Service, which operates the public museum on the island.

“Rebuilding Alcatraz into a modern prison is a stupid notion that would be nothing more than a waste of taxpayer dollars and an insult to the intelligence of the American people,” Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker and California Democrat whose district encompasses swaths of San Francisco, said in a statement on X.

San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie, a Democrat, dismissed the notion as unserious when Trump first began flirting with the idea last spring.

“If the federal government has billions of dollars to spend in San Francisco, we could use that funding to keep our streets safe and clean and help our economy recover,” Lurie wrote in a post on X after Trump deployed a delegation of federal officials — which included his now former Attorney General Pam Bondi and Federal Bureau of Prisons Director William Marshall — to size up the prison last July.

After the visit, Bondi teased the idea of using a renovated Alcatraz to imprison “illegal aliens.” And Trump suggested Alcatraz could serve as a model to counter former President Joe Biden’s border policies.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons said last year it would issue a “leave no stone unturned” directive to “determine whether the iconic Alcatraz can, once again, serve as a fortress of law and order.” Congress would need to approve Trump’s request for funding the Alcatraz project.

Alcatraz was designated a National Historic Landmark in the 1980s, giving it legally protected status. It’s unclear how the White House would circumvent that designation to open a federal prison. The White House declined to comment to MS NOW’s request about its plan to navigate Alcatraz’s legal protections, referring questions to the Office of Management and Budget.

Since returning to the White House last year, Trump has focused on what he calls “restoring truth and sanity to American history,” which has included revamping the Smithsonian Institution and national parks in his image — including a planned 250-foot arch along the Potomac River — while demolishing the East Wing of the White House to make way for his new ballroom.

As those plans become legally imperiled, his Alcatraz proposal also stands to face a battle.

“Alcatraz is a historic museum that belongs to the public,” Pelosi said. “San Franciscans will not stand for Washington turning one of our most iconic landmarks into a political prop.”

Emily Hung contributed to this report.

Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.

The Dictatorship

Critics scold Trump for staying mum on search for missing U.S. airman in Iran

Published

12 hours ago

April 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Apr. 4, 2026, 4:58 PM EDT

As the U.S. military searched Saturday for the missing crew member of an American F15-E fighter jet downed over Iran, critics slammed President Donald Trump for not speaking more forcefully about finding the airman and for overstating his war’s accomplishments.

Rep. Madeleine Dean, D-Pa., a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who appeared on MS NOW’s “The Weekend” Saturday, decried Trump’s speech to the nation earlier this week in which she said he “bloviated and bragged about the destruction of Iran’s ability to compete in this war,” which she said “seemed like he was just going to incite such an attack on our military.”

“So I pray for the safe return of the other pilot of the F-15, and I pray for a swift end to this war,” Dean said.

With the U.S. military in a race against time to locate the missing American aviator, the president has said very little about the search.

“Number one, we haven’t obliterated Iran’s capability,” Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, appearing on the same MS NOW show, said, referring to Trump’s claim on March 16 that the U.S. had “literally obliterated” Iranian threats. “That’s, that’s ridiculous to say.”

He said the Trump administration should be “pulling out all stops” to find the missing airman. Instead, Hertling noted, Trump has tepidly said “he hopes we’re going to find the other crew member and he’s not going to comment on what we’re going to do if we don’t.”

“You move mountains to try and find that individual, get them back to safety,” he said.

Shortly after the military plane went down Friday, Trump touted the idea of seizing Iranian oil that flows through the Strait of Hormuz. But he had yet to publicly condemn the attack. And on Saturday, the president remained mum on the missing service member, saying in a Truth Social post early reminding Iran of his imposed deadline to open the Strait of Hormuz: “Time is running out – 48 hours before all Hell will reign down on them. Glory be to GOD!”

Later Saturday afternoon, Trump posted a one-minute video allegedly of a “massive strike in Tehran,” which he said killed “many of Iran’s Military Leaders.” The timing of the strike and the source of the video were not known. MS NOW reached out to the White House for clarification and additional information about the president’s post.

Iran’s successful targeting of the U.S. aircraft suggests a different wartime reality than the one Trump conveyed in his address to the nation on Wednesday: Iran still has the military capacity to strike U.S. service members and target critical infrastructure deep within its American-allied Gulf Arab neighbors.

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said Saturday on MS NOW’s “Velshi” that Trump’s approach to the war overall is “problematic.”

“We’ve got an airman behind enemy lines trying to survive and trying to be rescued. And we should all think about him,” Smith said. “We should also think about the 13 service members who have been killed and the hundreds who have been wounded. So yes, that search is front of mind right now on the war in Iran.”

Bryan Stern, a U.S. military intelligence veteran who operates Grey Bull Rescue, a nonprofit organization that runs high-risk rescue missions in active war zones, said in an interview with MS NOW that “the life expectancy of a downed pilot behind enemy lines decreases exponentially every few hours.” And he said the Iranian regime Iran is “incentivized” to keep the U.S. service member alive for leverage in negotiations with the U.S. and Israel.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a staunch Trump ally, said after speaking with the president Saturday morning, “I am completely convinced that he will use overwhelming military force against the regime if they continue to impede the Strait of Hormuz and refuse a diplomatic solution to achieve our military objectives.” Graham did not mention the missing U.S. airman.

Trump claimed in his address that the “enemy suffered” clear and “devastating large-scale losses” in a matter of weeks. But less than three days after his prime-time speech, Tehran downed a two-seat fighter jet and struck at least two other American aircraft, including a Blackhawk helicopter involved in search efforts, injuring several of its crew members.

One crew member of the two-person F15-E jet was rescued by U.S. forces Friday. The second airman who is missing has been declared “DUSTWUN,” or “Duty Status, Whereabouts Unknown.”

Iran reportedly has offered a sizable reward to anyone who locates the missing U.S. military service member. The lone U.S. pilot of an A-10 Warthog attack jet that went down in Iran was rescued.

Trump declined to say what actions U.S. forces may take if the missing F-15E crew member is captured or harmed by the Iranians because “we hope that’s not going to happen,” he said in a phone interview with The Independent shortly after the jet went down Friday.

Emily Hung contributed to this report.