ICE Recruitment: 'Sloppy' Vetting or Strategic Ignorance?
Laura Jedeed of Slate chronicled her experience being recruited by ICE, where a minimal interview and seemingly rushed process led to a job offer. The article highlights concerns that such 'sloppy' vetting means the agency 'effectively has no idea who’s joining the agency’s ranks.' (The Independent, 'Journalist claims ICE offered her a job after six-minute interview and ‘sloppy’ vetting'). One
might wonder if 'sloppy' is the right word, or if 'desperate for warm bodies' better reflects an agency repeatedly criticized for questionable conduct, from family separations under Trump to conditions in detention centers. When accountability is low, and the job involves enforcing often brutal policies, perhaps thorough background checks for 'moral character' become less a priority than sheer
operational capacity. Who needs deep vetting when the mission itself is already so deeply controversial, and ethical concerns are frequently dismissed?