What kind of scenario-based training do ICE agents receive in 2025?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
In 2025 ICE’s scenario-based training combined traditional Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) modules—firearms, emergency-driving, and practical exercises—with agency-specific programs such as HSI’s HSISAT and ERO’s basic enforcement courses; however, the length and composition of that scenario training were sharply reduced amid a hiring surge, prompting questions from lawmakers and reporters [1] [2] [3]. Critics say the compressed, six‑day‑a‑week regimes prioritize rapid fielding of officers over prolonged supervised practice, while ICE and DHS point to continuity with core curricula and added on‑the‑job mentoring [3] [4] [2].
1. What the formal curriculum looked like in practice
New HSI special agents continued to flow through layered, scenario-heavy instruction: trainees first completed the roughly 12‑week CITP at FLETC—classroom lectures combined with practical exercises, firearms and physical techniques—followed by HSISAT, an agency-specific program with additional scenario instruction on investigative duties that lasts about 13 weeks in guidance published by ICE [1]. ICE’s enforcement tracks historically incorporated BIETP/ICE_D and legacy courses that include courtroom procedures, tactical drills, driver and firearms training plus written examinations—elements designed to replicate contact, arrest and deportation scenarios [2] [5].
2. The shift to compressed, reality‑based blocks in 2025
Beginning in 2025 the agency significantly compressed many of those academy timelines: multiple outlets and oversight reporting documented ERO/basic enforcement classes cut to roughly six weeks or 47 days delivered across eight weeks with six‑day training weeks, a shorter Basic Immigration Law Enforcement Training Program, and other truncated schedules intended to accelerate deployment of thousands of hires [6] [7] [3] [8]. The compressed model retained scenario elements—firearms drills, vehicle contact scenarios, and role‑play de‑escalation—but placed them into a far denser calendar, reducing cumulative supervised practice time [4] [8].
3. What the scenarios emphasized and what was scaled back
ICE’s scenario work continued to emphasize tactical contacts, arrest techniques, firearms qualification, emergency response driving and de‑escalation training as core skills, with instructors likening some exercises to unpredictable “haunted house” environments that force trainees to react to surprise variables [4] [1]. Reporting indicates some niche training offerings were reduced or removed during 2025 changes—Wikipedia and contemporaneous reporting noted the elimination of Spanish‑language coursework in certain tracks and truncated classroom time—though official ICE materials list a suite of required programs that remained part of job qualification [7] [2].
4. Oversight, controversy and competing narratives
The rapid compression of scenario training became a flashpoint after high‑profile incidents and a hiring boom: members of Congress demanded briefings on training changes and use‑of‑force protocols, while watchdog reporting warned that "wartime recruitment" bonuses and quick timelines could attract candidates less suited to complex, rights‑sensitive work [9] [8] [10]. ICE and DHS defended the accelerated approach as modernization and field mentoring, saying FLETC and agency programs were still delivering the core tactical and legal instruction needed for enforcement roles [3] [2].
5. Operational reality: classroom, scenarios and on‑the‑job learning
Even when academies were shortened, scenario‑based training did not disappear; instead, agencies relied more heavily on condensed simulation blocks at training sites in Georgia and on subsequent in‑field supervision and mentoring to build real‑world competence—an approach ICE publicly describes as continuous learning and accompanied by written testing and firearms/driver qualifications [1] [5] [4]. Independent reporters and military/oversight outlets, however, documented gaps in transparency about how many new hires received full enforcement versus investigative training and whether safeguards sufficiently compensated for lost classroom hours [10] [3].
6. Bottom line for assessing capability and risk
Scenario‑based drills in 2025 still covered the tactical repertoire expected of federal immigration officers—arrests, vehicle contacts, firearms and de‑escalation—but the compression of time on task and the sheer scale of rapid hiring introduced plausible tradeoffs between quantity of personnel and time for scenario practice, a tension flagged by lawmakers, reporters and former officials [3] [10] [8]. Public materials from ICE outline enduring course requirements, but independent reporting shows the agency’s reshaping of training schedules and priorities amid political pressure and expansion, leaving unresolved questions about whether shortened academies adequately replicate the depth of scenario experience previous multimonth programs provided [2] [6] [7].