United States Department of Homeland Security

In response to the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush announced the establishment of the Office of Homeland Security (OHS) to coordinate "homeland security" efforts. The office was headed by former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, who assumed the title of assistant to the president for homeland security. The official announcement states:

The mission of the Office will be to develop and coordinate the implementation of a comprehensive national strategy to secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks. The Office will coordinate the executive branch's efforts to detect, prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks within the United States.[5]

Ridge began his duties as OHS director on October 8, 2001.[6] On November 25, 2002, the Homeland Security Act established the Department of Homeland Security to consolidate U.S. executive branch organizations related to "homeland security" into a single Cabinet agency. The Gilmore Commission, supported by much of Congress and John Bolton, helped further solidify need for the department. The DHS incorporated the following 22 agencies.[7]

According to border theorist Peter Andreas, the creation of DHS constituted the most significant government reorganization since the Cold War[8] and the most substantial reorganization of federal agencies since the National Security Act of 1947 (which had placed the different military departments under a secretary of defense and created the National Security Council and Central Intelligence Agency). DHS constitutes the most diverse merger of federal functions and responsibilities, incorporating 22 government agencies into a single organization.[9] The founding of the DHS marked a change in American thought towards threats. Introducing the term "homeland" centers attention on a population that needs to be protected not only against emergencies such as natural disasters but also against diffuse threats from individuals who are non-native to the United States.[10]

Prior to the signing of the bill, controversy about its adoption was focused on whether the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency should be incorporated in part or in whole (neither were included). The bill was also controversial for the presence of unrelated "riders", as well as for eliminating certain union-friendly civil service and labor protections for department employees. Without these protections, employees could be expeditiously reassigned or dismissed on grounds of security, incompetence or insubordination, and DHS would not be required to notify their union representatives. The plan stripped 180,000 government employees of their union rights.[11] In 2002, Bush officials argued that the September 11 attacks made the proposed elimination of employee protections imperative.[12]

A U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer addresses Vice President Dick Cheney (center); Saxby Chambliss (center right), a U.S. Senator from Georgia; and Michael Chertoff (far right) in 2005

Congress ultimately passed the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and President Bush signed the bill into law on November 25, 2002. It was the largest U.S. government reorganization in the 50 years since the United States Department of Defense was created.

Tom Ridge was named secretary on January 24, 2003, and began naming his chief deputies. DHS officially began operations on January 24, 2003, but most of the department's component agencies were not transferred into the new department until March 1.[5]

President George W. Bush signs the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2004 on October 1, 2003.

After establishing the basic structure of DHS and working to integrate its components, Ridge announced his resignation on November 30, 2004, following the re-election of President Bush. Bush initially nominated former New York City Police Department commissioner Bernard Kerik as his successor, but on December 10, Kerik withdrew his nomination, citing personal reasons and saying it "would not be in the best interests" of the country for him to pursue the post.

On January 11, 2005, President Bush nominated federal judge Michael Chertoff to succeed Ridge. Chertoff was confirmed on February 15, 2005, by a vote of 98–0 in the U.S. Senate and was sworn in the same day.[5]

In February 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management issued rules relating to employee pay and discipline for a new personnel system named MaxHR. The Washington Post said that the rules would allow DHS "to override any provision in a union contract by issuing a department-wide directive" and would make it "difficult, if not impossible, for unions to negotiate over arrangements for staffing, deployments, technology and other workplace matters".[12] In August 2005, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer blocked the plan on the grounds that it did not ensure collective-bargaining rights for DHS employees.[12] A federal appeals court ruled against DHS in 2006; pending a final resolution to the litigation, Congress's fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for DHS provided no funding for the proposed new personnel system.[12] DHS announced in early 2007 that it was retooling its pay and performance system and retiring the name "MaxHR".[5] In a February 2008 court filing, DHS said that it would no longer pursue the new rules, and that it would abide by the existing civil service labor-management procedures. A federal court issued an order closing the case.[12]

On November 16, 2018, President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act of 2018 into law, which elevated the mission of the former DHS National Protection and Programs Directorate and established the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.[13] In fiscal year 2018, DHS was allocated a net discretionary budget of $47.716 billion.[2]

Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen resigned as secretary on April 7, 2019,[14] effective April 10.[15] On January 11, 2021, Chad Wolf resigned. Pete Gaynor became the acting secretary.[16] The office of secretary remained vacant.

On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th president of the United States. On that day, he appointed David Pekoske to be Acting Secretary of Homeland Security[17] while his nomination for Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, awaited approval by the Senate. Mayorkas, a Cuban refugee, would be the first Latino and immigrant to serve as DHS chief.[18]

Agencies

• United States Citizenship and Immigration Services: Processes and examines citizenship, residency, and asylum requests from aliens.
• U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Law enforcement agency that enforces U.S. laws along its international borders (air, land, and sea) including its enforcement of U.S. immigration, customs, and agriculture laws while at and patrolling between all U.S. ports-of-entry.
• U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Law enforcement agency divided into two bureaus:

1. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) investigates violations of more than 400 U.S. laws and gathers intelligence on national and international criminal activities that threaten the security of the homeland (Homeland Security Investigations); and
2. Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) enforces administrative violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act by detaining, deporting, and removing violators of United States immigration law.

• Transportation Security Administration: Responsible for aviation security (domestic and international, most notably conducting passenger screenings at airports), as well as land and water transportation security
• United States Coast Guard: Military service responsible for law enforcement, maritime security, national defense, maritime mobility, and protection of natural resources.[27]
• United States Secret Service: Law enforcement agency tasked with two distinct and critical national security missions:

1. Investigative Mission – The investigative mission of the USSS is to safeguard the payment and financial systems of the United States from a wide range of financial and electronic-based crimes.
2. Protective Mission – The protective mission of the USSS is to ensure the safety of the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, their immediate families, and foreign heads of state.

• Federal Emergency Management Agency: agency that oversees the federal government's response to natural disasters like earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, forest fires.

Passports for U.S. citizens are issued by the U.S. Department of State, not the Department of Homeland Security.

Advisory groups:

• Homeland Security Advisory Council: State and local government, first responders, private sector, and academics
• National Infrastructure Advisory Council: Advises on security of public and private information systems
• Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee: Advise the Under Secretary for Science and Technology.
• Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council: Coordinate infrastructure protection with private sector and other levels of government
• Interagency Coordinating Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities
• Task Force on New Americans: "An inter-agency effort to help immigrants learn English, embrace the common core of American civic culture, and become fully American."

Other components:

• Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office: Counter attempts by terrorists or other threat actors to carry out an attack against the United States or its interests using a weapon of mass destruction. Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen established the CWMD Office in December 2017 by consolidating primarily the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office and a majority of the Office of Health Affairs, as well as other DHS elements.
• Federal Law Enforcement Training Center: Interagency law enforcement training facilities located in Georgia, New Mexico, and South Carolina.
• National Protection and Programs Directorate: risk-reduction, encompassing both physical and virtual threats and their associated human elements.
  • Federal Protective Service: Federal law enforcement and security agency that protects and investigates crimes against U.S. federal buildings, properties, assets, and federal government interests.
  • National Communications System
• Directorate for Science and Technology: Research and development
• Directorate for Management: Responsible for internal budgets, accounting, performance monitoring, and human resources
• Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans: Long-range policy planning and coordination
  • Office of Immigration Statistics
• Office of Intelligence and Analysis: Identify and assess threats based on intelligence from various agencies
• Office of Operations Coordination: Monitor domestic security situation on a daily basis, coordinate activities with state and local authorities and private sector infrastructure
• Office of the Secretary includes the Privacy Office, Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Office of Inspector General, Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman, Office of Legislative Affairs, Office of the General Counsel, Office of Public Affairs, Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement (CNE), Office of the Executive Secretariat (ESEC), and the Military Advisor's Office.
• Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

In an August 5, 2002 speech, President Bush said: "We are fighting ... to secure freedom in the homeland."[28] Prior to the creation of DHS, U.S. Presidents had referred to the U.S. as "the nation" or "the republic" and to its internal policies as "domestic".[29] Also unprecedented was the use, from 2002, of the phrase "the homeland" by White House spokespeople.[29]

During a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on the reauthorization of DHS, Deputy Secretary Elaine Duke said there is a weariness and anxiety within DHS about the repeated congressional efforts to agree to a long-term spending plan, which had resulted in several threats to shut down the federal government. "Shutdowns are disruptive", Duke said. She said the "repeated failure on a longtime spending plan resulting in short-term continuing resolutions (CRs) has caused "angst" among the department's 240,000 employees in the weeks leading up to the CRs."[39] The uncertainty about funding hampers DHS's ability to pursue major projects and it takes away attention and manpower from important priorities. Seventy percent of DHS employees are considered essential and are not furloughed during government shutdowns.[39]

Ready.gov program logo

Soon after formation, the department worked with the Ad Council to launch the Ready Campaign, a national public service advertising (PSA) campaign to educate and empower Americans to prepare for and respond to emergencies including natural and man-made disasters. With pro bono creative support from the Martin Agency of Richmond, Virginia, the campaign website "Ready.gov" and materials were conceived in March 2002 and launched in February 2003, just before the launch of the Iraq War.[40][41][42] One of the first announcements that garnered widespread public attention to this campaign was one by Tom Ridge in which he stated that in the case of a chemical attack, citizens should use duct tape and plastic sheeting to build a homemade bunker, or "sheltering in place" to protect themselves.[43][44] As a result, the sales of duct tape skyrocketed, and DHS was criticized for being too alarmist.[45]

On March 1, 2003, the Federal Emergency Management Agency was absorbed into the DHS and in the fall of 2008 took over coordination of the campaign. The Ready Campaign and its Spanish-language version Listo.gov asks individuals to build an emergency supply kit,[46] make a family emergency plan[47] and be informed about the different types of emergencies that can occur and how to respond.[48] The campaign messages have been promoted through television, radio, print, outdoor and web PSAs,[49] as well as brochures, toll-free phone lines and the English and Spanish language websites Ready.gov and Listo.gov.

The general campaign aims to reach all Americans, but targeted resources are also available via "Ready Business" for small- to medium-sized business and "Ready Kids" for parents and teachers of children ages 8–12. In 2015, the campaign also launched a series of PSAs to help the whole community,[50] people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs prepare for emergencies, which included open captioning, a certified deaf interpreter and audio descriptions for viewers who are blind or have low vision.[51]

On March 1, 2004, the National Incident Management System (NIMS) was created. The stated purpose was to provide a consistent incident management approach for federal, state, local, and tribal governments. Under Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5, all federal departments were required to adopt the NIMS and to use it in their individual domestic incident management and emergency prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation program and activities.

In December 2004, the National Response Plan (NRP) was created, in an attempt to align federal coordination structures, capabilities, and resources into a unified, all-discipline, and all-hazards approach to domestic incident management. The NRP was built on the template of the NIMS.

On January 22, 2008, the National Response Framework was published in the Federal Register as an updated replacement of the NRP, effective March 22, 2008.

The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act directs the DHS Secretary to designate employees from throughout the department to staff a Surge Capacity Force (SCF). During a declared disaster, the DHS Secretary will determine if SCF support is necessary. The secretary will then authorize FEMA to task and deploy designated personnel from DHS components and other Federal Executive Agencies to respond to extraordinary disasters.[52]

The department has been dogged by persistent criticism over excessive bureaucracy, waste, ineffectiveness and lack of transparency. Congress estimates that the department has wasted roughly $15 billion in failed contracts (as of September 2008).[58] In 2003, the department came under fire after the media revealed that Laura Callahan, Deputy Chief Information Officer at DHS with responsibilities for sensitive national security databases, had obtained her bachelor, masters, and doctorate computer science degrees through Hamilton University, a diploma mill in a small town in Wyoming.[59] The department was blamed for up to $2 billion of waste and fraud after audits by the Government Accountability Office revealed widespread misuse of government credit cards by DHS employees, with purchases including beer brewing kits, $70,000 of plastic dog booties that were later deemed unusable, boats purchased at double the retail price (many of which later could not be found), and iPods ostensibly for use in "data storage".[60][61][62][63]

A 2015 inspection of IT infrastructure found that the department was running over a hundred computer systems whose owners were unknown, including Secret and Top Secret databases, many with out of date security or weak passwords. Basic security reviews were absent, and the department had apparently made deliberate attempts to delay publication of information about the flaws.[64]

On September 5, 2007, the Associated Press reported that the DHS had scrapped an anti-terrorism data mining tool called ADVISE (Analysis, Dissemination, Visualization, Insight and Semantic Enhancement) after the agency's internal inspector general found that pilot testing of the system had been performed using data on real people without required privacy safeguards in place.[65][66] The system, in development at Lawrence Livermore and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory since 2003, has cost the agency $42 million to date. Controversy over the program is not new; in March 2007, the Government Accountability Office stated that "the ADVISE tool could misidentify or erroneously associate an individual with undesirable activity such as fraud, crime or terrorism." Homeland Security's Inspector General later said that ADVISE was poorly planned, time-consuming for analysts to use, and lacked adequate justifications.[67]

Fusion centers are terrorism prevention and response centers, many of which were created under a joint project between the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs between 2003 and 2007. The fusion centers gather information from government sources as well as their partners in the private sector.[68][69]

They are designed to promote information sharing at the federal level between agencies such as the CIA, FBI, Department of Justice, U.S. military and state and local level government. As of July 2009, DHS recognized at least seventy-two fusion centers.[70] Fusion centers may also be affiliated with an Emergency Operations Center that responds in the event of a disaster.

There are a number of documented criticisms of fusion centers, including relative ineffectiveness at counterterrorism activities, the potential to be used for secondary purposes unrelated to counterterrorism, and their links to violations of civil liberties of American citizens and others.[71]

David Rittgers of the Cato Institute notes:

a long line of fusion center and DHS reports labeling broad swaths of the public as a threat to national security. The North Texas Fusion System labeled Muslim lobbyists as a potential threat; a DHS analyst in Wisconsin thought both pro- and anti-abortion activists were worrisome; a Pennsylvania homeland security contractor watched environmental activists, Tea Party groups, and a Second Amendment rally; the Maryland State Police put anti-death penalty and anti-war activists in a federal terrorism database; a fusion center in Missouri thought that all third-party voters and Ron Paul supporters were a threat ...[72]

In 2009, the Virginia Fusion Center came under criticism for publishing a terrorism threat assessment which stated that certain universities are potential hubs for terror related activity.[73] The report targeted historically black colleges and identified hacktivism as a form of terrorism.[74]

In 2006, MSNBC reported that Grant Goodman, "an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words "by Border Protection" and carrying the official Homeland Security seal."[75] The letter was sent by a devout Catholic Filipino woman with no history of supporting Islamic terrorism.[75] A spokesman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection "acknowledged that the agency can, will and does open mail coming to U.S. citizens that originates from a foreign country whenever it's deemed necessary":

All mail originating outside the United States Customs territory that is to be delivered inside the U.S. Customs territory is subject to Customs examination," says the CBP Web site. That includes personal correspondence. "All mail means 'all mail,'" said John Mohan, a CBP spokesman, emphasizing the point.[75]

The department declined to outline what criteria are used to determine when a piece of personal correspondence should be opened or to say how often or in what volume Customs might be opening mail.[75]

Goodman's story provoked outrage in the blogosphere,[76] as well as in the more established media. Reacting to the incident, Mother Jones remarked "unlike other prying government agencies, Homeland Security wants you to know it is watching you."[77] CNN observed "on the heels of the NSA wiretapping controversy, Goodman's letter raises more concern over the balance between privacy and security."[78]

In July 2006, the Office of Personnel Management conducted a survey of federal employees in all 36 federal agencies on job satisfaction and how they felt their respective agency was headed. DHS was last or near to last in every category including;

• 33rd on the talent management index
• 35th on the leadership and knowledge management index
• 36th on the job satisfaction index
• 36th on the results-oriented performance culture index

The low scores were attributed to concerns about basic supervision, management and leadership within the agency. Examples from the survey reveal most concerns are about promotion and pay increase based on merit, dealing with poor performance, rewarding creativity and innovation, leadership generating high levels of motivation in the workforce, recognition for doing a good job, lack of satisfaction with various component policies and procedures and lack of information about what is going on with the organization.[79][80]

DHS is the only large federal agency to score below 50% in overall survey rankings. It was last of large federal agencies in 2014 with 44.0% and fell even lower in 2015 at 43.1%, again last place.[81] DHS continued to rank at the bottom in 2019, prompting congressional inquiries into the problem.[82] High work load resulting from chronic staff shortage, particularly in Customs and Border Protection, has contributed to low morale,[83] as have scandals and intense negative public opinion heightened by immigration policies of the Trump administration.[84]

DHS has struggled to retain women, who complain of overt and subtle misogyny.[85]

In 2009, the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) made news for targeting supporters of third party candidates (such as Ron Paul), anti-abortion activists, and conspiracy theorists as potential militia members.[86] Anti-war activists and Islamic lobby groups were targeted in Texas, drawing criticism from the American Civil Liberties Union.[87]

According to DHS:[88]

The Privacy Office has identified a number of risks to privacy presented by the fusion center program:

1. Justification for fusion centers
2. Ambiguous Lines of Authority, Rules, and Oversight
3. Participation of the Military and the Private Sector
4. Data Mining
5. Excessive Secrecy
6. Inaccurate or Incomplete Information
7. Mission Creep

In the Center for Effective Government analysis of 15 federal agencies which receive the most Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, published in 2015 (using 2012 and 2013 data), the Department of Homeland Security earned a D by scoring 69 out of a possible 100 points, i.e. did not earn a satisfactory overall grade. It also had not updated its policies since the 2007 FOIA amendments.[89]

In 2018, the DHS was accused of referencing the white nationalist Fourteen Words slogan in an official document, by using a similar fourteen-worded title, in relation to illegal immigration and border control:[90]

We Must Secure The Border And Build The Wall To Make America Safe Again.[91]

Although dismissed by the DHS as a coincidence, both the use of "88" in a document and the similarity to the slogan's phrasing ("We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children"), drew criticism and controversy from several media outlets.[92][93]

While abolishing the DHS has been proposed since 2011,[94] the idea was popularized when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez suggested abolishing the DHS in light of the abuses against detained migrants by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection agencies.[95]

In 2020, the DHS was criticized for detaining protesters in Portland, Oregon. It even drew rebuke from the department's first secretary Tom Ridge who said, "It would be a cold day in hell before I would consent to an uninvited, unilateral intervention into one of my cities”.[96] On August 10, 2020 in an opinion article for USA Today by Anthony D. Romero, the ACLU called for the dismantling of DHS over the deployment of federal forces in July 2020 during the Portland protests.[97]

In December 2020, ACLU filed a lawsuit against the DHS, U.S. CBP and U.S. ICE, seeking the release of their records of purchasing cellphone location data. ACLU alleges that this data was used to track U.S. citizens and immigrants and is seeking to discover the full extent of the alleged surveillance.[98]