(UNITED STATES) Nearly a quarter of the FBI’s special agents are now assigned to immigration enforcement work, according to FBI data, marking one of the largest internal resource shifts in the bureau’s modern history. As of October 9, 2025, approximately 25% of the FBI’s more than 13,000 special agents have been moved from missions such as cybercrimes, terrorism, drug trafficking, and counterintelligence to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement with arrests and removals. In some of the largest FBI field offices, the share reportedly reaches 40%. The policy, advanced under President Trump, reflects a broader strategy to expand immigration enforcement through multi-agency support and large-scale ICE deployment.
The reassignment sits inside a much wider push. The administration has deployed about 33,000 federal employees from various agencies to assist ICE, according to information summarized in the same context. The scale of the ICE deployment suggests a long-term posture, not a brief surge. That has raised questions inside the FBI and among outside observers about what happens to complex, time‑sensitive criminal cases that require weeks, months, or years of careful work.
FBI officials have not publicly detailed which specific investigations saw staffing cuts, but the categories listed—cyber intrusions, terrorism threats, cartel-linked trafficking, and counterintelligence—are among the bureau’s highest priorities. National security specialists worry that even a temporary loss of investigators can slow case development, delay arrests, and cause missed leads. Morale concerns have also surfaced, with some agents reporting frustration at being pulled from long-running cases to handle immigration enforcement assignments.
Resource shift and field office impact
In large urban field offices, where cyber and counterintelligence teams often manage fast-changing cases and sensitive sources, the reduction in personnel has been especially sharp. The figure reaching up to 40% reassigned in certain offices means supervisors must reshuffle caseloads, ask agents to cover unfamiliar matters, or pause parts of multi-defendant investigations.
For families awaiting outcomes in fraud or trafficking cases, that can mean longer waits for justice. For businesses hit by ransomware or data theft, fewer available agents can slow recovery and case referrals.
According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the move aligns with the administration’s goal to prioritize removal operations and interior enforcement. That includes support for workplace actions and broader cooperation with state and local partners. While the FBI’s participation is lawful when coordinated through federal tasking, the balance between immigration work and core criminal and national security missions remains a live policy debate with real-world consequences.
The Department of Homeland Security has long relied on interagency help for large operations. ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, which leads arrests and removals of people with final orders or pending cases, is central to these efforts. Readers seeking the official overview can consult ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations. The current environment shows how decisions at the top of government translate into field-level staffing and day-to-day priorities for federal agents across the United States 🇺🇸.
Questions about public safety and due process
Supporters of the shift argue that stronger interior enforcement helps uphold federal law, discourages unlawful entry, and maintains order at the border and inside the country. They point to the sheer scale of recent operations and say the FBI’s precision skills—surveillance, interviews, evidence handling—improve case quality and reduce errors. They also contend that a concentrated ICE deployment helps clear backlogs and serves as a deterrent.
Critics raise three main concerns:
- Moving thousands of skilled investigators from cyber and counterterrorism can weaken early-warning systems against hackers, extremists, and foreign intelligence services.
- Community trust may erode, especially if mixed-status families fear reporting crimes or serving as witnesses while FBI agents reassigned to immigration enforcement take part in arrests.
- Burnout and lower morale can follow when agents trained for complex criminal probes are repeatedly shifted to duties that do not use their specialized experience.
Key numbers at a glance
- About 25% of FBI agents reassigned to immigration enforcement nationwide
- Up to 40% in some large field offices
- Roughly 33,000 federal employees from multiple agencies supporting ICE
- Ongoing policy under President Trump to increase enforcement capacity
Impact on immigrants, families, and employers
For immigrants and their families, the picture is mixed. On one hand, the presence of FBI personnel during operations can add procedural rigor. On the other hand, broader enforcement activity can bring more arrests at homes or workplaces, heightening fear in communities and straining local support networks.
Lawyers and community groups commonly advise:
- Keep key documents and copies in a secure place
- Have trusted lawyer phone numbers readily available
- Prepare an emergency plan (who will pick up children, who to contact)
- Know basic rights: the right to remain silent and the right to speak with an attorney
When ICE deployment expands, worksite actions tend to rise. That can disrupt operations and supply chains if employees are detained or records are seized for review. Employers often:
- Review I-9 files and internal procedures more closely
- Conduct regular audits with qualified counsel
- Provide clear staff training to reduce compliance errors
Long-term consequences for the FBI’s core missions
The broader question is how long the FBI can maintain these levels of reassignment without lasting effects on its core mission. Cybercriminals adapt quickly when they sense lower pressure. Terror networks and foreign intelligence services probe for gaps. Counterintelligence investigations, especially, depend on continuity and trust with sources.
When seasoned agents leave midstream, rebuilding momentum can take months. FBI data shows the move is ongoing, suggesting this balance will remain a central policy issue into the near future.
Inside the bureau, morale matters. Agents work long hours and build deep expertise; being rotated into immigration enforcement can feel like stepping away from a craft honed over years. Managers must keep both enforcement demands and national security work on track. Training cycles become more complex, and travel for enforcement operations pulls agents away from family more often.
The human side of this policy choice is not a footnote—it is part of how well federal law enforcement performs.
Practical steps for communities and next steps
For communities, practical preparation helps:
- Families: keep copies of identity documents, emergency contacts, and lawyer information
- Local leaders: share clear, lawful information and avoid rumors
- Journalists and advocates: focus on verified facts—like the FBI’s 25% reassignment figure and field office peaks of 40%—to keep public discussion grounded
As the administration continues to expand immigration enforcement under President Trump, the country will watch whether the benefits of added manpower to ICE outweigh the costs to the FBI’s other missions. The numbers are large, the stakes are high, and the results will shape public safety, due process, and trust in federal institutions.
This Article in a Nutshell
FBI data show that by October 9, 2025, roughly 25% of the bureau’s more than 13,000 special agents were reassigned to assist ICE in immigration enforcement, with some large field offices reporting reassignment rates up to 40%. The administration has additionally deployed about 33,000 federal employees from other agencies to support ICE, indicating a sustained operational posture. The reallocations have prompted concerns about reduced capacity in high-priority areas such as cyber intrusions, terrorism, drug-trafficking and counterintelligence, where continuity matters for long-term investigations. Supporters argue the FBI’s investigative skills enhance enforcement accuracy, while critics warn of delayed cases, lowered morale, and eroded community trust. The central policy debate weighs public safety and due process against expanded interior enforcement.
