Trump’s ICE Weapons Spending Rises 700%, Includes Missile Warheads

(UNITED STATES) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement increased its outlays on weapons by about 700% in 2025, directing tens of millions of dollars toward guns, ammunition, chemical agents, explosives, and even “guided missile warheads and explosive components,” according to federal procurement data reviewed by Popular Information. From January 20, 2025 (the date of President Trump’s inauguration) through October 18, 2025, ICE spent $71,515,762 on “small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing,” compared to $9,715,843 over the same period in 2024 — a sevenfold jump.

The surge in ICE weapons spending lines up with the administration’s broader push to scale up immigration enforcement across the United States. The spending is dominated by purchases of guns and body armor, but Popular Information reports “significant” orders for chemical weapons and components described in procurement categories as “guided missile warheads and explosive components.” On September 29, 2025, ICE made a single purchase of $9,098,590 from Geissele Automatics, a company known for semi-automatic and automatic rifles.

While federal data captures transactions tied to ICE’s specific codes, analysts caution the totals likely understate the full scope of weaponry supporting the nationwide crackdown, since other agencies are also involved in field operations.

How 2025 compares to prior years

A review of past spending underscores how unusual 2025 looks.

• The current outlay not only exceeds levels under President Biden, it also tops the yearly average during President Trump’s first term, which hovered around $8.4 million per year for small arms and related items.
• Former ICE Acting Director John Sandweg called the present enforcement effort “unprecedented,” saying the country has “never seen a nationwide immigration enforcement effort like this,” as cited by Popular Information.
• Analysis by VisaVerge.com indicates the scale of the 2025 procurement points to an enforcement posture that is both broader and more heavily armed than in prior years.

What the data shows and how it’s being used

The most striking pattern is timing. The increase began immediately after January 20, 2025, and continued through at least October 18, 2025, reflecting a sustained push rather than a one-time purchase.

• Procurement categories flagged range from standard-issue firearms to more specialized items, including chemical agents and the classification for guided missile warheads.
• Procurement labels can be broad; ICE has not provided an item-level breakdown or a detailed field deployment policy.
• Civil liberties groups have raised alarms that the procurement classifications signal a deeper militarization of immigration policing.

On the ground, the ramp-up coincides with reports of forceful incidents. Advocates point to several 2025 cases:

• A Christian pastor struck with a pepper ball.
• An ICE officer who dropped and then brandished a firearm during an arrest.
• A CBS News reporter hit by a pepper ball while covering events not tied to ICE.

The ACLU of Illinois and other groups have filed lawsuits alleging an escalation in violence and excessive force by ICE officers. They argue that procurement trends—especially purchases flagged as chemical weapons and items classified as guided missile warheads—risk blurring lines between domestic law enforcement and military tactics.

ICE has not publicly released a detailed breakdown explaining each type of purchase or its field deployment policy. Supporters of the ramp-up counter with operational safety concerns:

• They cite a reported 700% increase in assaults on ICE agents in 2025 compared to 2024.
• They argue more protective gear, higher-grade weapons, and expanded tactical tools are needed to protect officers during high-intensity operations.
• Proponents view the enforcement cycle as a necessary response to organized smuggling networks and larger targeted arrests.

Policy, budget, and the road ahead

The procurement surge accompanies a broader expansion of ICE’s mission and resources pushed by the administration.

Key provisions in the proposed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”:

• ICE’s annual budget projected to jump from about $8.7 billion to $27.7 billion.
• $75 billion set aside over four years.
• $45 billion for 80,000 new detention beds.
• $30 billion to hire 10,000 new ICE employees, upgrade facilities, and expand removal operations.

If enacted, ICE would become the highest-funded federal law enforcement agency, outpacing the FBI and DEA, and rivaling the budgets of some national militaries.

• As of October 20, 2025, the bill had passed the Senate and was awaiting final approval in the House.
• The administration has pledged to remove hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants each year, with an internal goal of up to 1 million deportations annually.

If hiring targets are met, ICE’s staff with arrest authority could soon exceed the FBI’s, shifting the balance of federal street-level law enforcement power. Popular Information notes that while ICE is central, other federal partners are involved — another reason advocates warn the spending totals likely represent only part of the picture.

Local impacts and community response

Chicago has become a focal point, with a presidential order to surge federal agents to the city. Community effects include:

• Heightened fear across mixed-status households; parents worry that any routine encounter could trigger detention.
• School counselors report students withdrawing from after-school programs.
• Legal clinics note increased client inquiries about avoiding public spaces.
• Local shelters report more families seeking emergency help after a primary earner was detained.
• Employers in agriculture, food processing, and logistics warn that large operations disrupt supply chains when workers vanish from shifts.
• Faith leaders are spending more time responding to parishioners’ fears than on regular ministry.

Though ICE leadership emphasizes targeted operations and compliance with federal law, families report officers appearing at homes or workplaces with little notice, increasing trauma and uncertainty even when cases end with release.

Legal and advocacy challenges

Legal and advocacy responses are escalating:

• Lawsuits filed in Illinois and elsewhere claim constitutional violations and improper use of force.
• Attorneys are collecting body-worn camera footage and medical records to support claims tied to pepper-ball incidents and alleged improper firearm handling.
• Some suits also challenge the procurement process itself, arguing purchases classified as chemical weapons and guided missile warheads are inconsistent with a domestic civil enforcement mission.

Procurement transparency advocates are urging Congress to add requirements such as:

• Item-level reporting for any purchase classified under chemical weapons or “guided missile warheads and explosive components.”
• Firm rules of engagement for the use of such equipment in domestic operations.
• Routine public reporting on use-of-force incidents tied to specific equipment categories.

Practical guidance for affected families and communities

Immigration lawyers and community organizations recommend:

• Keep key documents in one accessible place.
• Know exactly who in the household has legal status and who does not.
• Develop a family plan in case someone is detained.
• Attend local “know your rights” sessions to learn how to respond if officers arrive at a home or workplace.

Popular Information’s reporting has also sparked debate among immigration practitioners:

• Some worry enforcement tone can influence outcomes in routine civil proceedings (bond, discretionary decisions).
• Others note immigration courts still operate under civil standards and that enforcement tactics do not change legal tests for relief.

Both sides agree the scale of the 2025 buildup sets it apart from past cycles.

Oversight, uncertainty, and possible futures

The future path depends on several moving parts:

• House action on the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”
• ICE’s success in hiring and training thousands of new staff.
• Legal outcomes of pending excessive-force cases.

Potential scenarios:

1. If the bill becomes law and hiring targets are met:
   • Expect more field activity in more places and a longer reach into interior enforcement.
   • ICE’s operational footprint could expand significantly.
2. If legal challenges slow the rollout:
   • Spending could shift toward training, oversight, and protective equipment rather than controversial procurement categories.
   • Oversight measures or reporting requirements could alter procurement and deployment practices.

The federal data is clear: a huge jump in 2025 purchases, including items categorized as chemical weapons and “guided missile warheads and explosive components.” The procurement change is not only about numbers — it signals a different kind of force the government is preparing to deploy in civil immigration enforcement, and raises questions about what that means for people whose lives may be reshaped by a knock on the door.

Follow contract data on official databases such as https://www.usaspending.gov/, which aggregates federal procurement records. Even detailed records may not answer the central question for many families: what the buildup will mean for day-to-day life.