USCIS Law Enforcement Powers Expanded: What the 2025 DHS Final Rule Means for Immigration

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced a sweeping change that reshapes the mission of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). On September 5, 2025, DHS published a final rule titled “Codification of Certain U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Law Enforcement Authorities” in the Federal Register. The regulation, which takes effect October 6, 2025, formally grants USCIS new law enforcement powers—authorities that had long been associated primarily with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

For immigration attorneys, advocates, and anyone navigating the immigration system, this rule signals a major shift. USCIS, once primarily seen as a benefits-focused adjudicatory agency, is now stepping directly into the realm of immigration enforcement.

What the USCIS Law Enforcement Rule Authorizes

The 2025 final rule amends Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations to give USCIS officers the power to carry out a range of enforcement activities. Among the most notable authorities are the ability to execute search and arrest warrants, detain noncitizens, arrest individuals for certain immigration-related offenses, and in some cases use non-deadly or even deadly force.

The regulation also codifies USCIS’s authority to release individuals on bond, conduct expedited removal, and carry firearms when properly trained. To support these powers, the rule defines what constitutes a “law enforcement official” and clarifies the standards for “basic immigration law enforcement training.” Importantly, USCIS itself has discretion to determine when training is “substantially equivalent,” leaving room for flexible but potentially uneven standards.

Why DHS Expanded USCIS Enforcement Powers

According to DHS, the expansion of USCIS’s enforcement powers is intended to strengthen national security and public safety. USCIS already investigates immigration benefit fraud through its Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate. The agency often identifies cases involving national security threats or criminal conduct during the benefits process. By granting USCIS its own law enforcement authority, DHS argues, the agency can address these issues more efficiently without relying exclusively on ICE or CBP.

The change also aligns with Executive Order 14159, “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” which emphasizes strict enforcement of immigration laws. By codifying the delegation of powers, DHS says it is providing transparency and clarity to the public.

Concerns About USCIS as a Law Enforcement Agency

While DHS frames the rule as a practical modernization, many legal experts and immigrant advocates see risks in expanding USCIS’s mission. Traditionally, USCIS has functioned as the “service” side of the immigration system—processing green cards, visas, and naturalization applications. Giving the same agency authority to arrest, detain, and use force against noncitizens creates what critics describe as “mission creep.” Applicants may now worry that applying for immigration benefits could expose them to enforcement action, eroding trust in the system.

There are also concerns about accountability and training. The rule allows USCIS to decide what counts as equivalent law enforcement training. If standards are inconsistent or insufficient, mistakes could lead to civil rights violations or constitutional challenges. Expanding authority to carry firearms and use deadly force within an agency not historically structured for enforcement raises further concerns about oversight.

Another challenge lies in the overlap with ICE. Although DHS promises updated memoranda of agreement to clarify roles, jurisdictional conflicts are likely. Multiple agencies with overlapping enforcement authority could lead to duplication, inefficiency, or inconsistent practices.

Legal and Constitutional Challenges Ahead

The rule is also likely to face litigation. DHS has argued that this regulation is primarily about agency organization and procedure, which can exempt it from the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). But opponents may claim the rule imposes substantive changes that directly affect the rights of immigrants, meaning full APA procedures should have applied.

There may also be constitutional challenges. If USCIS officers conduct arrests or searches without proper oversight, cases could raise Fourth Amendment questions about unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as Fifth Amendment due process claims. With USCIS’s new ability to use force, questions about excessive use of power could quickly surface in federal court.

What Immigration Lawyers and Applicants Should Watch

For immigration practitioners, the practical question is how USCIS will implement these authorities. Will officers exercising law enforcement powers be limited to specific fraud or security investigations, or will authority extend more broadly across the agency’s field offices? How will internal USCIS guidelines on arrests, searches, and use of force be structured—and will they be made public?

Applicants and their representatives will need to pay close attention to how benefit applications are handled when potential fraud or criminal concerns arise. The days of USCIS referring such cases almost exclusively to ICE may be ending.

Conclusion: A Turning Point for USCIS

The 2025 DHS final rule represents a turning point in U.S. immigration enforcement. By codifying USCIS law enforcement powers, DHS has transformed an agency long focused on adjudicating benefits into one that also wields significant enforcement authority. Supporters argue that this change will strengthen national security and improve efficiency in combating immigration fraud. Critics warn that it risks undermining trust, blurring institutional roles, and exposing USCIS to litigation and oversight challenges.

One thing is clear: the rule will fundamentally reshape how USCIS operates and how immigrants and their attorneys interact with the agency. In the coming months, the true impact will depend not only on the regulatory text but also on how aggressively USCIS chooses to exercise its new powers.