CISA Officials Overseeing Disinformation Operations Placed on Administrative Leave

CISA Staff Combating Disinformation Placed on Administrative Leave Amid Agency Review

Department of Homeland Security officials confirmed Wednesday that multiple employees at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) responsible for countering disinformation and foreign influence operations have been placed on administrative leave while the agency undergoes an internal evaluation.

This action comes as part of a broader initiative by newly appointed DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to restructure CISA’s operations and mission scope. The move responds to concerns from Republican lawmakers who have claimed that the agency’s past efforts to address false information on social media platforms may have resulted in censorship of conservative viewpoints.

“The agency is undertaking an evaluation of how it has executed its election security mission with a particular focus on any work related to mis-, dis-, and malinformation,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in a statement to Nextgov/FCW. “While the agency conducts the assessment, personnel who worked on mis-, dis-, and malinformation, as well as foreign influence operations and disinformation, have been placed on administrative leave.”

According to the Office of Personnel Management, administrative leave constitutes an “administratively authorized absence from duty without loss of pay or charge to leave.” The exact number of affected employees has not been disclosed by the department.

This development represents the latest shift in the federal government’s approach to combating disinformation. In a parallel move, Attorney General Pam Bondi recently disbanded the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, which was established in 2017 specifically to counter foreign interference in U.S. elections.

CISA’s disinformation efforts gained prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic and in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election. During this period, the agency maintained regular contact with major social media platforms, alerting them to content containing misinformation that originated from both foreign adversaries and domestic sources.

However, these activities became increasingly controversial following a July 2023 lawsuit filed in Missouri. The legal action alleged that the Biden administration’s flagging of certain content violated First Amendment protections and disproportionately targeted conservative voices. Many of the posts in question related to COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and former President Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of election fraud. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the Biden administration last year.

The organizational changes at CISA come amid broader personnel shifts within the Department of Homeland Security. The Trump administration’s deferred resignation program, which initially exempted CISA and other DHS components due to national security concerns, has now been extended to the cybersecurity agency’s workforce. A federal judge recently paused implementation of this program while legal challenges are being considered.

Former CISA Executive Director Brandon Wales, who left the agency in August, defended the organization’s anti-disinformation initiatives during recent congressional testimony. Wales emphasized that these efforts constituted less than one percent of the agency’s budget—approximately $2 million out of its $3 billion total allocation—and firmly denied allegations that CISA engaged in censorship of American citizens.

The reevaluation of CISA’s role in combating disinformation highlights the ongoing tension between national security concerns and free speech protections in the digital age. As foreign adversaries continue to employ sophisticated influence operations targeting U.S. democratic processes, federal agencies are navigating complex questions about the appropriate boundaries of government intervention in the information ecosystem.

The outcome of CISA’s internal assessment could significantly reshape how the federal government approaches the challenge of false information in the context of election security, potentially establishing new precedents for the relationship between government agencies and social media platforms.