The National Security Costs Of Diverting

We all want a secure border and fair enforcement of immigration laws. But at what cost? When tens of thousands of federal and local officers and agents are diverted from their core missions to immigration enforcement, most notably the mass deportation of noncitizens from this country, regardless of whether the noncitizen has a criminal record or poses a threat to public safety. This large-scale diversion of personnel risks fewer agents protecting Americans from terrorists, cyber criminals, drug cartels, and foreign spies. The tradeoff affects every American, not only by the risks to our safety and security it creates, but also by the Administration’s movement of large numbers of critical personnel and resources without Congressional action, which furthers a drive toward an unchecked executive and authoritarian regime.

A recent Cato Institute article revealed that more than 25,000 federal law enforcement agents, officers, and other personnel, along with state and local officers, have already been redirected this year to support Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO). Immigration enforcement is a legitimate mission. But the cost of stripping resources from counterintelligence, counterterrorism, cyber defense, and organized crime is steep, and it puts our broader national security at risk.

Counterintelligence. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is the lead U.S. agency defending against espionage, sabotage, and protection from foreign interference. Every FBI agent reassigned to ICE is one fewer tracking Russian spies or investigating Chinese cyber attacks. Adversaries exploit gaps, and missing counterintelligence threats risks stolen secrets, compromised officials, and unmitigated foreign cyber intrusions.

Counterterrorism. The FBI, Diplomatic Security Service (DSS), and ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) all play essential roles in identifying terrorist networks and preventing attacks. These investigations are resource-intensive, requiring years of surveillance, intelligence sharing, and investigative work. Prioritizing immigration over terrorism prevention leaves Americans more vulnerable to attacks that could have been disrupted.

Cybersecurity. FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) cyber teams protect hospitals, utilities, elections, and private data from ransomware and state-sponsored hacking. These missions demand constant vigilance and international coordination. Pulling resources away to conduct immigration sweeps risks slowing responses to cyberattacks that can cripple communities or even the nation’s critical infrastructure.

Organized crime and cartels. The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), and HSI are deeply embedded in the fight against cartels, gun traffickers, money launderers, and human traffickers. These networks profit from border chaos and drive migration into the United States by people whose lives are often in danger because of these networks or who otherwise feel their only means to leave persecution in their home country is via a trafficker. Neglecting organized crime investigations in favor of mass removals risks strengthening some of the very actors that, in part, drive migration by individuals without lawful status, in the first place.

Politicization of law enforcement. Beyond these direct security costs, the diversion of agents suggests a deeper problem: the politicization of law enforcement and the national security mission. Democracies erode when leaders redirect, without legal authority, the resources of security agencies to serve a narrow political agenda. While border security is an important mission, subordinating counterintelligence, counterterrorism, and cyber defense to immigration priorities and eroding the apolitical foundations of security agencies, particularly without the consent of the people’s representatives in Congress, is yet one more troubling step down the path to authoritarianism.

The diversion of over 25,000 federal agents and local officers means more spies and terrorists unmonitored, more cyberattacks left unchallenged, more cartels operating unchecked, and more politicization of law enforcement. In the end, the true cost of this policy, and its unilateral implementation by the Administration, will not be measured in deportation statistics but in the threats we miss, the attacks we fail to stop, and the resilience we lose when unchecked executive action and political agendas override a balanced national security strategy, taking us one step closer to an authoritarian regime.

Jaime Ellison is a former senior intelligence officer with two decades of service in the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, specializing in counterintelligence and security. She has a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in Applied Operations Research in Terrorism Risk Analysis. Jaime is a member of The Steady State.

Peter Mina is a former Deputy Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the Department of Homeland Security and a previous Chief of the Labor and Employment Law Division of the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Peter is a member of The Steady State.

Founded in 2016, The Steady State is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(4) organization of more than 300 former senior national security professionals. Our membership includes former officials from the CIA, FBI, Department of State, Department of Defense, and Department of Homeland Security. Drawing on deep expertise across national security