ICE officers aren’t trained in airport security. Can they help ease long lines?

Immigration officers have been deployed to airports across the United States to help alleviate long lines caused by staffing shortages amid the ongoing partial government shutdown. However, questions are emerging about the effectiveness of this strategy and its potential impact on travelers.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers began appearing at select airports Monday, where they were seen standing near security checkpoints but not actively screening passengers. The deployment comes as Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workers, who remain unpaid during the shutdown, have been calling in sick in record numbers, creating significant delays at major hubs nationwide.

The Trump administration has provided limited details on the specific roles ICE officers will play in airport operations. President Trump suggested Monday that airports were “fertile territory” for immigration enforcement but quickly clarified that the officers were “really there to help” with the staffing crisis.

Industry experts remain skeptical about how much assistance ICE can realistically provide. Keith Jeffries, former head of TSA security at Los Angeles International Airport and current vice president at K2 Security Screening, points to the specialized nature of TSA’s work.

“Can they do some of the duties? Perhaps,” said Jeffries. “There is just zero chance for them to be operating X-rays, conducting bag checks and pat-downs.” He explained that TSA agents undergo extensive classroom training in security screening procedures, followed by “weeks or months” of hands-on training.

Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar, indicated Sunday that immigration officers could potentially staff exit lanes, which would free up TSA agents to focus on critical security screening points. This limited role acknowledges the specialized training gap between the agencies.

ICE officers themselves receive different training entirely, focused either on immigration law enforcement (for deportation officers) or complex criminal investigations (for Homeland Security Investigations agents). While some ICE personnel do work within airports, their expertise lies far from passenger screening protocols.

The presence of ICE agents in airports adds another dimension of tension to an already strained situation. The agency has become a lightning rod in the immigration debate, particularly after aggressive enforcement actions across multiple cities last year.

“There are going to be people who are going to be uncomfortable seeing ICE agents at the airport,” noted Zach Griff, author of travel industry blog “From the Tray Table.” He expressed cautious optimism about ICE’s potential to assist but emphasized this isn’t a sustainable solution.

Jeffries raised additional concerns that ICE’s controversial status could actually create new problems, potentially attracting protesters who might further strain airport resources. The Department of Homeland Security has cited security reasons for not disclosing which airports would receive ICE officers.

The political dimensions of this deployment run deep. The shutdown itself centers partly on disputes over ICE operations, including the controversial practice of officers wearing masks during enforcement actions. Democrats have demanded restrictions on mask usage before agreeing to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which would restore pay to TSA workers.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer expressed skepticism about the deployment, stating, “Everywhere ICE goes, trouble follows. We’ve seen that, and it is highly likely the airports will be no exception. No one trusts that ICE is going to make things better.”

President Trump addressed the mask controversy Monday, saying he supports officers wearing masks when arresting “hardened criminals” but would “greatly appreciate, however, NO MASKS” when helping at airports.

As travelers continue facing extended wait times at security checkpoints, industry veterans like Jeffries maintain that only one real solution exists: ending the congressional impasse and restoring full funding to the Department of Homeland Security.

“There is no substitute — and I don’t even think ICE would disagree with that,” he concluded.