(UNITED STATES) House Democrats are pressing the Department of Homeland Security for detailed answers after the agency reassigned hundreds of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) staff to work on border security and immigration enforcement, including within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Federal Protective Service. Lawmakers say the CISA staff reassignments unfolded over recent weeks and hit teams that handle federal cyber defense and crucial public-private partnerships, according to letters sent to DHS leadership as of October 22, 2025.
DHS has told employees the reassignments are compulsory and warned that refusal could lead to termination, according to congressional offices briefed on the matter. The department has defended its posture broadly, saying it continues to deliver cyber threat intelligence and defend against nation-state and criminal actors. But DHS has not released updated figures on workforce reductions or given a detailed justification for moving specialized cyber personnel into immigration roles.
The political backdrop is central. The Trump administration’s immigration agenda has driven rapid expansion across DHS’s enforcement arms, with tens of billions of dollars steered toward detention, faster deportations, and physical and technology-based border fortification. In July, Congress authorized $150 billion for ICE deportation operations, including surveillance and tracking technology. Supporters argue the money responds to operational demands at the border. Critics say siphoning scarce cyber staff weakens the United States at a time of elevated cyber risk.
Democratic Lawmakers Press DHS
Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.) led a letter arguing DHS may have violated the Antideficiency Act by directing CISA employees into non-cyber roles without proper legal authority. The letter also questions whether DHS ran impact assessments before issuing reassignment notices and whether those moves match CISA’s statutory role to reduce risks to critical infrastructure. It flags that termination notices reportedly reached teams that coordinate with private companies and other public partners to help stop cyberattacks, raising fears about gaps in national defense.
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a leading voice on cyber policy, called for:
- An immediate halt to workforce cuts
- Reinstatement of employees who were transferred or dismissed
- Full disclosure of the effect on CISA’s operational readiness
Lawmakers also want:
- A count of how many staff were reassigned
- Which divisions were hit
- What specific immigration or border duties those employees are now performing
Democrats say the episode underscores a larger concern: DHS is stretching its internal talent pool without clear legal guardrails. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the push to move cyber personnel into enforcement functions could reshape how DHS balances competing missions, especially if reassignments become a tool to meet short-term border demands.
Cyber Defense Capacity at Risk
The personnel moves have centered on CISA’s Capacity Building unit and its Stakeholder Engagement Division—groups that:
- Train federal, state, and local networks
- Share threat information with industry
- Coordinate responses across sectors like energy, health care, and finance
Those functions form the backbone of day-to-day cyber resilience. If they slow or stall, defenders lose time and visibility, and attackers gain space to move.
DHS maintains that critical services continue. But the agency has not disclosed how many specialists remain in key roles or how long the reassignments will last. Cyber professionals warn that even temporary shifts can have lasting effects:
- Projects pause
- Relationships with outside partners cool
- Muscle memory built through joint exercises fades
When staff face compulsory orders backed by termination threats, morale can collapse and people with rare skills may decide to leave government entirely.
Ethical and Practical Concerns
Reports that immigration detentions have at times snared U.S. citizens have added to skepticism about using cyber personnel in enforcement settings far from their training. Lawmakers want to know:
- How DHS vetted the skill match for these roles
- What duties reassigned staff now perform
- What safeguards exist to avoid errors or civil rights harms
For companies that depend on CISA alerts and joint defense planning, the uncertainty is immediate. Small utilities, municipal governments, and hospital systems—often thinly staffed—rely on CISA advisers to patch known flaws, practice incident response, and recover quickly after ransomware attacks. If fewer advisers are available, these organizations may face:
- Longer waits for help
- Delayed mitigation steps
- Less frequent threat briefings
Election officials are also at risk. Local jurisdictions count on CISA for scanning services, tabletop exercises, and rapid threat updates. Any slowdown could force state and county offices to seek private help they can’t afford or to accept higher risk during tight timelines.
Calls for Transparency and Remedies
DHS’s critics say the department should be transparent about trade-offs. If reassignments are necessary, they argue DHS should publish:
- The workload model behind its choices
- The duration of each assignment
- The backfill plan to keep core cyber services running
And if the agency acted without the right approvals, lawmakers say those decisions should be reversed and staff returned to the mission Congress set in statute.
The department’s defenders counter that DHS is a single enterprise facing dual pressures: sustained cyber threats and heavy flows at the border. They argue leadership can surge talent across components when needed. Still, absent clear numbers, even some supporters acknowledge DHS should provide:
- A timeline
- A list of deprioritized tasks
- An explanation of how it will prevent long-term damage to cyber readiness
Policy experts note that recent administrations have both highlighted foreign adversaries and criminal gangs for aggressive campaigns against critical infrastructure. President Biden has directed agencies to harden networks and push basic security controls. President Trump highlighted immigration and border enforcement as top priorities. The friction now is whether an enforcement surge justifies draining a cyber team built to face daily, fast-moving digital threats.
House Inquiry and Requested Documents
The House inquiry seeks concrete documents, including:
- Internal memos authorizing the reassignments
- The legal basis cited for those actions
- Any risk assessments produced
- Staffing maps showing which positions moved
Lawmakers also want CISA leadership to explain which services have been delayed or canceled and how the agency is tracking mission effects over time.
For families and workers caught in immigration cases, the question is simpler: will these moves speed proceedings or improve safety? DHS has not said whether reassigned staff are assigned to detention support, data analysis, or field duties. Without that detail, it’s hard to judge real-world gains against potential losses in cyber defense.
CISA’s legal charge is to reduce risks to national critical functions. Readers can review that mission on the agency’s official site at CISA – About. If DHS is moving specialists away from that mission, lawmakers say, the public deserves a clear, lawful explanation—and a plan to restore capacity fast.
As of October 22, 2025, the issue remains unresolved. House Democrats are seeking transparency, reversal of workforce cuts, and the return of reassigned personnel to cyber roles. DHS says its defenses remain strong. The weeks ahead will test whether Congress can extract details, whether DHS can sustain cyber operations without interruption, and whether the reassignments will stand or be rolled back.
Key takeaway: Lawmakers demand documentation and explanations to determine whether reassigning CISA cyber staff to immigration enforcement was lawful, wise, or harmful to national cybersecurity.
This Article in a Nutshell
House Democrats have demanded answers from the Department of Homeland Security after hundreds of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) employees were reassigned to border security and immigration enforcement roles at ICE, CBP and the Federal Protective Service. The reassignments reportedly targeted Capacity Building and Stakeholder Engagement teams—units that train partners, share threat intelligence, and coordinate incident responses—raising concerns about reduced cyber readiness. Lawmakers claim orders were compulsory with termination warnings and question the legal basis, possible Antideficiency Act violations, and whether impact assessments were performed. Congress seeks internal memos, legal citations, staffing maps and risk assessments. DHS says cyber functions continue, but has not disclosed detailed workforce figures or timelines. Critics warn that even temporary reassignments can pause projects, cool partner relationships, and weaken defenses; Democrats want reversals, transparency, and plans to restore capacity if needed.
