1. United States
2. N.J.
3. Letter

You are permitting a federal agency to operate far outside its intended scope, with consequences that are no longer hypothetical—they are already unfolding. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has undergone a documented collapse in training standards. Internal records show that as of 2026, the agency cut roughly 40% of its instructional time, including hands-on training, firearms training, and even hours dedicated to understanding legal authority. This is not a minor administrative change—it is a structural dismantling of professional competency. At the same time, hiring standards have been lowered and oversight mechanisms weakened, even as the agency receives billions in expanded funding. Predictably, the results are alarming. Reports show patterns of abuse, corruption, and misconduct among personnel, including physical violence, sexual abuse of detainees, and exploitation of authority for personal gain. Courts have also documented widespread violations of judicial orders—dozens in a single month—raising serious concerns that this agency is operating with open disregard for the rule of law. And yet, instead of narrowing its scope, ICE is being pushed into unprecedented roles. Agents historically trained for administrative detention and transfer work are now being deployed into street-level enforcement operations they were never designed to handle. Even more concerning, there are proposals and pilot efforts to use ICE personnel in roles far outside immigration enforcement, including transportation security functions traditionally handled by Transportation Security Administration. This is reckless. TSA agents undergo specialized screening and threat-detection training that ICE agents simply do not receive—and, based on current trends, are increasingly less equipped to receive. The danger is no longer confined to immigrants. When a federal enforcement body with reduced training, weakened oversight, and a documented pattern of misconduct is normalized in broader domestic roles, the line between targeted enforcement and generalized policing begins to disappear. That is how abuse spreads. The reported use of ICE influence in private matters—such as the involvement of Paolo Zampolli in leveraging ICE action during a custody dispute—should alarm every member of this body. When federal enforcement tools can be bent toward personal or political advantage, you are no longer dealing with law enforcement. You are enabling a mechanism for selective power. Congress created ICE. Congress funds it. Congress has the authority—and the obligation—to rein it in. Failure to act is not neutrality. It is complicity in the expansion of a poorly trained, under-regulated force being deployed in ways that threaten the rights and safety of the very public you are sworn to protect.