This article first appeared in Slate.
Trump’s Proposed Policies and the Role of the Federal Protective Service
As President-elect Donald Trump prepares for a potential second term, he has outlined a series of policies that have sparked significant controversy. These include military actions against Mexican drug cartels, potential bans on abortion pills, a renewed Muslim travel ban, and extensive immigration crackdowns. These actions are expected to ignite large-scale public protests, and Trump has indicated he will respond with force.
Central to managing these protests is the Federal Protective Service (FPS), a lesser-known but potent law enforcement entity under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 highlights the FPS as crucial in curbing dissent. There is a growing call for Congress and other governmental bodies to act swiftly to prevent the misuse of this agency against political adversaries.
The Federal Protective Service and Its Expanding Role
The FPS is tasked with safeguarding federal buildings and the people who access these facilities daily. However, post-9/11 changes have stretched its original security mandate, leading to potential overreach. The 2002 Homeland Security Act permits FPS officers to operate beyond federal properties under vague terms, leading to expansive off-site operations.
During the 2020 Portland protests, for instance, the FPS was involved in aggressive law enforcement actions. Federal officers, including 300 Border Patrol special forces agents, were deployed to quell largely peaceful demonstrations. Actions taken included the use of unmarked vehicles to detain protesters, surveillance of journalists, and the compilation of intelligence dossiers on demonstrators.
Historical Precedents and Concerns
This was not the first instance where FPS actions raised concerns. In 2015, federal officers were sent to Baltimore during Black Lives Matter protests, and more recently, the agency has been involved in monitoring political expressions online unrelated to federal properties. Such activities have involved the use of secretive intelligence contractors.
Calls for Reform and Oversight
To curb potential abuses, there are recommendations for reform. These include prohibiting the deployment of specialized police forces like Border Patrol on domestic grounds and removing the broad authority granted to the FPS for undefined activities. Additionally, transparency in the agency’s operations is urged by releasing relevant policies and guidance.
State and local governments are also urged to limit cooperation with federal operations through laws that restrict the sharing of resources and intelligence. The Brennan Center has proposed a set of principles for these governments to follow.
With President-elect Trump signaling a tough stance against dissent, and the FPS’s broad mandate, there is heightened concern over the potential for politically motivated use of the service. As Trump has vowed to target “enemies from within” and endorsed police crackdowns, the need for oversight and reform of the FPS is pressing.
