You can access a PDF version of this explainer at this link: Explainer: Training Under the Revived 287(g) Task Force Model
Introduction
Congress established the 287(g) program in 1996 through amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The statute makes clear that state and local officials authorized to perform immigration enforcement duties must possess knowledge of federal law, receive training in federal enforcement, and be supervised and directed by federal officials. Thus, participation in most 287(g) programs has required substantial training commitments from local and state law enforcement agencies. The second Trump administration is aggressively expanding the 287(g) program, which enables state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration laws through three primary models: the Jail Enforcement Model (JEM), the Warrant Service Officer Model (WSOM), and the Task Force Model (TFM). The JEM focuses on jail settings, the WSOM authorizes officers only to serve administrative warrants, and the TFM is the most expansive, allowing deputized officers to investigate immigration status during routine patrols and community encounters. Discontinued in 2012, the TFM was revived by the Trump administration in January 2025. Under the TFM, officers can question individuals during traffic stops, access federal databases, and make civil immigration arrests without a concurrent criminal charge.
Historically, both the JEM and the TFM required a four-week, in-person training program, while the more-limited WSOM required just eight hours of training. The JEM continues to mandate a four-week training and a one-week refresher course. However, in reviving the TFM, the Trump administration is only requiring a 40-hour online training course. This fast-tracked training time raises questions about officer preparedness and the federal government’s ability to ensure consistent enforcement standards across jurisdictions.
Background on 287(g) Training Requirements
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is responsible for training state and local law enforcement officers who participate in 287(g) programs. Before the TFM was discontinued, officers selected for the TFM and the JEM attended the four-week Immigration Authority Delegation Program (IADP) at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Charleston, South Carolina. According to Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) from 2009, the in-person IADP training curriculum included guidance on the terms and limits of the MOA itself, the scope of authority granted to deputized officers, immigration law and relevant federal policies, and ICE’s Use of Force Policy. Officers also received instruction on federal civil rights law, Justice Department guidance on race and law enforcement, procedures for public outreach and complaints, liability issues, cross-cultural understanding, and the obligation under both federal law and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations to notify consulates when foreign nationals are arrested or detained. To become deputized under 287(g), officers were required to pass all examinations with a score of at least 70 percent and subsequently complete a one-week refresher course.
ICE’s training of 287(g) participants has faced criticism for lacking depth and oversight by government watchdogs. For example, in 2010, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) raised concerns that the civil rights law training given to 287(g) participants was inadequate. A 2018 DHS OIG report also found that ICE was not monitoring officers’ completion of required online refresher trainings. Observers noted that program managers were “stretched thin,” hindering “ICE’s ability to adequately manage, oversee, and educate participating agencies in enforcing immigration laws correctly.” Subsequently, another government watchdog reported on continuing deficiencies, with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) finding in 2021 that ICE had failed to establish performance goals for oversight of law enforcement agency partners, including training compliance.
Fast-Tracked Training for Participants in the Task Force Model
Looking to dramatically expand the 287(g) program, the second Trump administration introduced “streamlined” training requirements for state and local 287(g) program participation under the revived TFM. Task Force Officer (TFO) nominees, who must have at least two years of law enforcement experience, no longer need to complete the four-week, in-person IADP to become deputized. Instead, they must complete a 40-hour online course covering “scope of authority, immigration law, civil rights law, cross-cultural issues, liability issues, complaint procedures, and obligations under federal law.” The new process no longer requires in-person participation, with ICE guidance indicating that this training can be conducted “in-person and online, recorded or virtual-meeting formats, as determined by ICE.” The guidance also does not specify if TFOs will be required to complete refresher training.
Despite the prior warnings from government oversight agencies about the training of 287(g) participants, the program is now expanding at an unprecedented rate with less training requirements and less oversight than before. As of September 2, 2025, ICE reported that state and local police from 40 states are participating in the TFM, with 8,501 TFOs trained and over 2,000 additional officers in training. The new, accelerated training requirements for the TFM do aid the administration’s goal of rapidly expanding immigration enforcement capabilities of participating 287(g) law enforcement agencies but may compromise the TFM’s effectiveness and public safety outcomes.
While the online, compressed training format reduces staffing strain by requiring less time away from local jurisdictions, it also creates significant risks for both law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. Officers who are insufficiently prepared for the complexities of immigration enforcement may struggle to accurately identify individuals who are truly removable or to properly document cases for federal prosecution. Such challenges can undermine the program’s stated goals of improving public safety and supporting federal immigration priorities. In addition, officers with limited training are more likely to make errors that result in costly litigation and weaken community trust, which may reduce cooperation between residents and law enforcement on broader public safety matters.
Conclusion
The Trump administration’s revived TFM offers state and local agencies a way to train deputized officers more quickly so they can directly carry out immigration enforcement. The fact that training has shifted to a 40-hour online course increases the likelihood of inconsistent enforcement by participants in the TFM, leaving them open to potential lawsuits for misconduct. As the administration accelerates 287(g) expansion, it should carefully consider the consequences of these rushed training requirements, which risk undermining program effectiveness and the communities it aims to protect.