What training components (e.g., de‑escalation, Spanish language) were reduced or moved online during ICE’s 2025 compression?

Checked on February 4, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Reporting indicates ICE sharply compressed new-enrollee training in 2025, explicitly cutting Spanish‑language requirements (about five weeks) and shifting at least some coursework to virtual pre‑ and post‑residence modules, while compressing remaining in‑residence instruction into an eight‑week, six‑day‑a‑week schedule that industry coverage describes as roughly 47–48 in‑person days; however, the precise list of moved or reduced modules and the degree to which core subjects were preserved is disputed between outlets citing anonymous officials and DHS statements defending the curriculum [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].

1. Spanish‑language instruction: the clearest cut

Multiple outlets report that ICE removed or reduced Spanish‑language training to shorten the overall program by roughly five weeks, with agency training officials acknowledging cuts to language requirements as part of the compression strategy [1] [3] [6]. The Associated Press and other reporting cited Caleb Vitello, who runs ICE training, saying Spanish‑language requirements were cut to accelerate deployment, making this the most directly documented component reduction in the reporting reviewed [1] [3].

2. Virtualizing classroom coursework: before and after FLETC residence

International and investigative reporting noted ICE shifted some material out of the in‑residence Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) block into virtual courses completed before and after the eight‑week residency, a change described as part of an effort to “streamline” instruction and use technology to cover material that previously required on‑site time [2] [5]. El País explicitly reported that the 16‑week residential program was reduced to eight weeks with “additional virtual courses” completed outside the residential window, and DHS messaging claims technology and reduced redundancy enabled greater throughput without sacrificing subject matter content [2] [5].

3. Compressed but retained tactical and core law‑enforcement training

Reporting indicates that physical, tactical and core law‑enforcement elements—obstacle courses, defensive tactics, firearms, high‑speed driving and immigration law—remained part of the in‑residence curriculum, albeit in a more compressed schedule that ran six days per week for eight weeks [2] [7]. DHS and FLETC officials have publicly asserted that de‑escalation, conflict management and fundamental skills are still taught at FLETC, positioning those as preserved components even as the delivery cadence changed [5].

4. What the record does not firmly show: de‑escalation depth, online vs. in‑person split, and other deletions

Investigations and fact‑checks emphasize uncertainty: The Atlantic’s report relied on unnamed officials to say training fell to “47 days,” and fact‑checkers note ambiguity over how many of the eight weeks were full training days versus calendar days, leaving the exact split of in‑person versus virtual instruction and the fate of other specific modules unclear [3] [4]. While multiple outlets report Spanish cuts and virtual coursework, there is no public, itemized curriculum change list in the reporting reviewed that definitively catalogs every component moved online or shortened beyond those mentions [3] [2] [1].

5. Political framing, oversight and competing narratives

The “47‑days” framing—sometimes presented as a symbolic nod to the 47th president—helped the claim spread widely, but fact‑checking outlets and DHS responses underscore political spin and gaps in documentation: DHS insists basic subjects remain taught and highlights FLETC’s expanded capacity, while oversight bodies including the DHS inspector general have launched reviews of hiring and training to assess whether operational needs and standards have been met [8] [5] [9]. That mix of anonymous sourcing, politically resonant headlines, agency denials, and ongoing oversight reviews means the clearest verified changes are the Spanish‑language reduction and the shift of some coursework to virtual modules, with other alleged cuts or moves remaining under-documented in available reporting [1] [2] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
What exactly did the DHS inspector general find about ICE training changes in its 2025–2026 review?
How do FLETC virtual training modules compare, in content and hours, to prior in‑residence lessons for ICE recruits?
What evidence exists on outcomes (use‑of‑force incidents, complaint rates) for ICE officers trained under the compressed 2025 regimen?