Bill Would Replace Department Of Homeland Security

U.S. Department of Homeland Security seal on blue fabric — Photo: Mirza Kadic / Shutterstock

A sitting congresswoman just proposed to dismantle the Department of Homeland Security, abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and redirect at least $150 billion to social programs.

Story Highlights

Rep. Delia Ramirez announced a plan to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.
The plan would replace the Department of Homeland Security with a Department of Community Safety while keeping disaster, cyber, and aviation functions.
At least $150 billion in Department of Homeland Security funds would shift to health care, housing, and food aid.
Department of Homeland Security leaders and Illinois Republicans warned the plan risks public safety and border control.

What Ramirez Proposed, In Plain Terms

Representative Delia Ramirez rolled out a legislative plan to “dismantle” the Department of Homeland Security, abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, and stand up a new Department of Community Safety. Her office said the plan would preserve the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Transportation Security Administration, and the government’s cybersecurity arm, while “beginning” a separate civil immigration system. Local outlets reported the same core mechanics after the event, confirming the bill’s headline moves.

The pitch ties the change to harms Ramirez and allies link to post-9/11 security growth. The release says the new department would limit government surveillance, rein in abuses of data, and curb militarized enforcement. Ramirez framed it as a “community-led roadmap” that moves money from federal enforcement to local support systems. The messaging matches years of activist pushes to separate immigration from national security structure, not just rebrand it.

The Money Move: A Claimed $150 Billion Shift

Coverage of the rollout reported a fiscal claim: at least $150 billion in Department of Homeland Security funds would be redirected to health care, housing, food assistance, and related services. That figure appears as an early estimate, not a formal Congressional Budget Office score. Without a methods memo, skeptics will treat it as a marker, not a bankable budget line. Still, the number signals scope. It suggests a multi-year effort to shrink detention, deportation, and surveillance costs and replace them with civil services.

Any serious restructuring would raise hard questions. Which accounts move? What happens to multi-year contracts? Who inherits legal authorities for investigations, removals, and border operations? The press release nods at continuity by preserving the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Transportation Security Administration, and key cybersecurity work, but offers no transition blueprint. That gap is where implementation either lives or dies.

Security, Borders, And The Conservative Test

Opponents moved fast. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin blasted the idea as a defund-the-police echo and said 270,000 department personnel keep Americans safe. He argued the proposal favors people here unlawfully over citizens. Illinois Republican Party chair Bob Grogan questioned the timing after the 9/11 anniversary and warned taxpayers already feel funds shifting toward migrants. That critique aligns with a basic conservative test: protect citizens first, secure borders, and keep cops backed, not sidelined.

Media reports also noted a Department of Homeland Security warning that sharp attacks on Immigration and Customs Enforcement had fueled more assaults on agents. If true, rhetoric that paints front-line officers as villains can raise risks for people doing a dangerous job. That matters for anyone who backs law and order. Critics of abolition also argue that eliminating Immigration and Customs Enforcement would impair work against cross-border crime, human trafficking, and efforts to remove criminal noncitizens. On public safety grounds, that claim tracks with common sense concerns about fewer tools against bad actors.

What We Know, What We Don’t, And What Would Settle It

The facts on the table are clear. Ramirez wants to end Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, restructure the Department of Homeland Security into a new Department of Community Safety, and redirect huge sums to social supports. Multiple outlets confirm those mechanics, and her office’s release anchors the claims. What we do not have is bill text, timelines, or a map for moving authorities, people, and gear to successor parts of government. That missing detail is the feasibility hinge.

Two proof points would change the debate. First, a formal budget score that shows where the $150 billion comes from, over what period, and with what tradeoffs. Second, a transition plan that keeps aviation security, disaster response, cybersecurity, border administration, and cross-border crime work online from day one. Without those, the plan reads like values-first design with real political heat but soft operational bones. Supporters see a chance to shrink harms; critics see a hole in the fence. Voters will weigh which risk feels bigger.