Listen to the article
Americans sharply divided over ICE as agency faces scrutiny amid rapid expansion
New polling data reveals deep partisan divisions over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as the agency confronts increased public scrutiny following two fatal shootings of American citizens during protests in Minnesota.
According to a comprehensive survey conducted by NPR, PBS, and Marist, 60 percent of Americans disapprove of ICE’s performance, while just 33 percent express approval. This disapproval rating reflects a growing concern about the agency’s enforcement methods, with the percentage of Americans who believe ICE has gone “too far” in enforcing immigration laws jumping 11 percentage points since last summer.
The partisan divide on the issue is stark. Among Democrats, disapproval of ICE has reached a near-unanimous 91 percent, with independents following at 66 percent. Republicans stand in sharp contrast, with 73 percent expressing approval of the agency’s work.
These polling results come at a critical juncture for ICE, which has undergone a dramatic expansion under the Trump administration. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced in January that ICE has more than doubled its workforce following an aggressive recruitment campaign that drew approximately 220,000 applications. The agency has grown from about 10,000 agents to roughly 22,000 nationwide.
To fuel this rapid expansion, the administration offered substantial financial incentives to new recruits, including signing bonuses of up to $50,000, student loan repayment assistance up to $60,000, and premium pay increases of up to 25 percent.
However, this swift growth has raised significant questions about the agency’s training protocols, particularly in light of recent controversial incidents. Historically, ICE recruits—including deportation officers and special agents—have undergone extensive training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) in Georgia. These programs typically lasted several months and covered a comprehensive curriculum including legal standards, tactical instruction, and enforcement procedures.
Recent reporting suggests this training regimen has been substantially compressed. According to fact-checking by the Poynter Institute, drawing on multiple news sources, the training period for some ICE agents has been reduced from approximately five months to about eight weeks of classroom and hands-on instruction—roughly 48 training days if conducted six days per week.
The Atlantic, in reporting analyzed by Poynter, found that key elements of ICE’s previous training programs, such as language instruction, cultural training, and immersive coursework, have been either reduced or replaced with shorter instruction blocks and greater reliance on technology.
Despite this abbreviated training timeline, ICE maintains stringent prerequisites for employment. DHS requires all candidates to clear a background check, drug screening, medical examination, and physical fitness evaluation before entering training. Many ICE law enforcement positions also require at least a bachelor’s degree or an equivalent combination of education and relevant work experience.
These baseline requirements, according to DHS, aim to screen for reliability and sound judgment in high-stress enforcement scenarios. However, critics question whether the abbreviated training period adequately prepares agents for the complex legal, tactical, and ethical challenges they will face in the field.
The polling results and scrutiny of ICE’s training practices come at a time of heightened tensions surrounding immigration enforcement nationwide, with the agency increasingly finding itself at the center of America’s contentious immigration debate. As ICE continues its expansion under the current administration, questions about appropriate training, oversight, and accountability are likely to remain at the forefront of public discourse.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
11 Comments
Concerning to see the fatal shootings of American citizens during ICE protests. This highlights the need for greater accountability and oversight of the agency’s enforcement methods.
Absolutely. Excessive use of force and lack of transparency are major issues that must be addressed.
The rapid expansion of ICE under the Trump administration has clearly led to increased scrutiny and controversy. It will be interesting to see how this issue evolves and if there are any policy changes ahead.
The rapid expansion of ICE under Trump has clearly backfired, with a majority of Americans now disapproving of the agency’s work. This will likely be a major issue in the upcoming elections.
Interesting to see the stark partisan divide on views of ICE. This reflects the broader tensions around immigration policy and enforcement. It will be important to follow how public opinion evolves on this issue.
Agreed. The agency’s actions and performance will likely continue to be heavily scrutinized, especially with the upcoming elections.
The data shows a majority of Americans disapprove of ICE’s work, which is concerning. However, the partisan split suggests this is a highly polarized issue. Hopefully, there can be a more balanced and constructive dialogue.
That’s a good point. Finding common ground and a more nuanced approach will be crucial, rather than further entrenching partisan positions.
It’s troubling that nearly two-thirds of independents disapprove of ICE’s performance. This suggests the agency’s actions are alienating a key segment of the electorate.
Good point. Independents often hold the balance of power, so ICE’s standing with this group could have important political implications.
The partisan divide on views of ICE is a reflection of the broader political polarization in the US. Bridging this divide and finding pragmatic solutions will be a significant challenge.