‘we Don’t Need Him’: Dhs Officials Relieved Trump’s Ice Pick Is Stalled

President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement is stalled in the Senate. That’s just fine with many at ICE.

Some officials inside the Department of Homeland Security, which houses ICE, question Oklahoma state trooper Lance Schroyer’s qualifications to lead the agency. And they also prefer acting director Dave Venturella, an ally of border czar Tom Homan, who is viewed as a familiar and steady set of hands, according to interviews with six officials and others familiar with conversations inside the department.

“We don’t want [Schroyer]. We don’t need him. Leave us alone. We are running better than ever,” said one of the officials. “People need to stop telling us how to do what we do best.”

Many are relieved that Senate Homeland Security Chair Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has blocked a hearing on Schroyer until the administration shares more information about its probes into federal agents’ killings of two American citizens earlier this year in Minneapolis, putting his nomination in limbo. And there’s a general feeling inside the agency that the White House isn’t going above and beyond to change the senator’s mind.

“I don’t get a sense that this nomination is going anywhere,” said the official, who, like others quoted in this story, was granted anonymity to speak freely about feelings toward Schroyer within the administration.

The White House said Schroyer remains the president’s nominee to lead ICE, and that “congressional scheduling should not be interpreted as any personnel announcements.”

Trump’s announcement in June that he was nominating Schroyer, a senior adviser at DHS who is a longtime associate of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, surprised many inside the agency and spurred immediate public blowback from immigration hardliners outside the administration. Now, almost two months later, Mullin has seemingly done little to change minds — in what has emerged as another datapoint in a widening rift between the DHS secretary and the immigration hawks he has struggled to keep on his side. Some of those hawks question whether Schroyer has the immigration enforcement experience necessary to carry out the president’s mass deportation agenda.

Schroyer is Mullin’s handpicked person for the job. That “shows how out of touch Mullin is. That’s not even JV level for literally the most important job in the admin that remains unfilled,” a second official said. “Mullin clearly doesn’t subscribe to mass deportations.”

Mike Howell, president of The Oversight Project, a conservative-leaning watchdog group, said in an interview that Schroyer’s lack of record on deportations undermines a pitch Mullin made during his own confirmation hearing — that he’d defer to agency heads given their expertise on the issues.

“If the whole point was to have someone with no immigration enforcement background either ideologically, politically or operationally as secretary, then it’s kind of odd to have a similar person as the head of ICE, as opposed to somebody with familiarity or activism on the issue,” Howell said.

DHS said in a statement that Mullin stands by the president’s nominees and looks “forward to him bringing nearly 30 years of law enforcement experience to lead the men and women of ICE.”

Mullin has argued in interviews that Schroyer is one of a few candidates for the role who could actually clear Senate confirmation, boosting morale at the agency. No ICE director nominee has been approved by the Senate since 2014, meaning ICE has generally been led by an acting director.

It is unlikely the Senate could confirm any ICE director nominee with a significant track record at ICE, given how polarizing the agency has become under Trump. Venturella’s past work for major private detention company GEO Group has been raised previously by some in the administration as an impediment to his potential nomination before the Senate.

Mullin has also pointed to Schroyer’s experience standing up special units in the Oklahoma Highway Patrol to locate abducted children, and spearheaded implementation of the state’s 287(g) program, which allowed state and local police to work with ICE to arrest and deport unauthorized immigrants.

“Lance is the right person for the job,” Mullin said earlier this summer on Fox. “He’s going to bring in professionalism. He’s going to bring in structure.”

But few inside DHS want to see a change from the status quo under Venturella, who under the Federal Vacancies Act can stay indefinitely as acting ICE director while Schroyer’s nomination is pending. A third administration official indicated that if Schroyer’s nomination falters, the expectation inside DHS is that Venturella would be left in place for as long as possible, given how effective he’s been in the role at this point.

A senior White House official acknowledged that “everyone knows Dave,” who is a familiar figure at ICE, but reiterated that the president selected Schroyer. “People can have personal relationships with Dave or whoever, but ultimately, it’s who the president wants in that position.”

Venturella — who rejoined ICE in 2025 — is leading the agency as Mullin looks to thread the needle between meeting an ambitious annual target for deportations and keeping immigration enforcement out of the headlines. Officials say he has improved morale and helped bring calm to the agency after intense scrutiny earlier this year following the January shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minneapolis.

“Everyone loves Dave,” said the first DHS official, who added that for some rank-and-file ICE personnel, the nomination has created uncertainty.

“Is Dave like a lame duck, or is he the director?” the official added.

For now, that question will linger as the administration faces a considerable problem simply getting Schroyer’s nomination out of committee. Paul has been one of the Republicans most critical of ICE’s heavy-handed approach to enforcement since Trump returned to the White House, meaning he will likely closely scrutinize Schroyer and his ability to rein in ICE tactics.

Even if Paul yields and holds a hearing for Schroyer, he could always vote against advancing Schroyer’s nomination to the full Senate, as he did with Mullin, if he finds Schroyer’s answers unsatisfactory. A unanimous vote before the full Senate can discharge a committee from needing to vote on a nomination or bill before it’s brought to the Senate floor — but Paul and most Democrats would likely balk at that. Paul’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Should Paul vote against advancing Schroyer, the administration would need to find one Democrat willing to cross the aisle. During Mullin’s confirmation, the administration could count on the vote of Sen. John Fetterman (D-Penn.), the maverick moderate who rooted his support for Mullin in the personal relationship the two had forged serving together in the Senate, to overcome Paul’s specific personal frustrations with Mullin.

Fetterman’s office did not respond to an inquiry about the senator’s position on Schroyer’s nomination.

In hallway interviews after his nomination, other Democrats on the panel made clear Schroyer’s nomination was a no-go for them.

“He’s about one of the least credible nominees one could have,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said.