The United States’ Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has reportedly spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to air controversial recruitment adverts during NFL and college football games.
The initiative is part of ICE’s aggressive strategy to recruit local officers frustrated with their cities’ restrictions on immigration enforcement to Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts.
The advertising spots have been aired in a dozen select metropolitan areas across the country, including Chicago, Seattle and Atlanta.
‘You took an oath to protect and serve, to keep your family, your city, safe,’ the narrator says, as images of the cities targeted and ICE agents arresting people move across the screen. ‘But in sanctuary cities, you’re ordered to stand down while dangerous illegals walk free.’
ICE has reportedly dropped at least $6.5million on the 30-second spots as of last week as part of the $76.5billion budget that the Trump administration sought for the agency and its deportation efforts, according to The Associated Press.
And a large chunk of that $6.5million spending spree has reportedly been used on buying up airtime during prime sporting events, including college football game days and NFL showdowns.
ICE has reportedly spent millions to air recruitment advertisements. US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is pictured during a press conference in June
ICE has bought up airtime during NFL and college football games to run the 30-second spots
Sports fans were quick to pick up on ICE’s football blitz, which included a Monday night matchup between the Denver Broncos and Cincinnati Bengals on ESPN on September 29.
They have also reportedly run during SEC games on the network and ABC, as well as appearing on other networks too.
A 30-second advert during primetime college football games costs around $300,000, according to John Ourand.
The Daily Mail has contacted the NFL Network, ESPN and Fox Sports for comment. ICE has also been contacted by The Daily Mail for explanation as to why football airtime was chosen to run the commercials.
The spots have also reportedly seeped into the programming of UFC and WWE events.
The campaign comes amid ICE’s threats to patrol this season’s Super Bowl in San Francisco after Bad Bunny was named the performer for February’s halftime show.
Trump advisor Corey Lewandowski confirmed earlier this month that the agents will have a presence at America’s biggest event after the 31-year-old pop star snubbed the US during his tour over fears ICE would target fans outside his shows.
‘It’s so shameful they picked someone who seems to hate America,’ Lewandowski said.
ICE agents will be patrolling the Super Bowl in the Bay Area next February, whether halftime performer Bad Bunny (pictured) likes it or not
Corey Lewandowski (pictured right), an advisor to Donald Trump , confirmed that they will have a presence at America’s biggest event after the 31-year-old rapper said he wouldn’t play the US during his tour out of fears ICE would be outside the shows
‘There is nowhere you can provide safe haven to people who are in this country illegally. Not the Super Bowl and nowhere else. We will find and deport you. That is a very real situation.’
The MAGA world, including former NASCAR driver Danica Patrick, erupted after the Puerto Rican artist was named for the highly-coveted gig.
Bad Bunny addressed his decision to make a sole mainland US appearance just moments before the NFL revealed he was playing the Super Bowl.
‘I’ve been thinking about it these days, and after discussing it with my team, I think I’ll do just one date in the United States,’ the musician tweeted in Spanish.
Meanwhile, the advertisement campaign, which is not limited to sporting broadcast coverage, is part of ICE’s $30bn initiative to hire 10,000 more deportation officers by the end of the year to supercharge deportations.
The 30-second spots began running in mid-September in Albuquerque, New Mexico; Boston; Chicago; Denver; New York; Philadelphia; Sacramento, California; Seattle; and Washington, D.C. Adding to the list a week ago: Atlanta; Dallas; El Paso, Texas; Houston; Miami; Salt Lake City; and San Antonio.
As of October 6, total spending on the ads had topped $6.5m, with the most spent since mid-September being $853,745 in the Seattle area, according to the Associated Press.
The money is part of the $76.5bn – a 10-fold increase in its current budget – sought by Trump’s Republican administration for ICE as part of the sweeping, multitrillion-dollar tax breaks and spending cuts bill enacted in July.
The money is part of the $76.5bn sought by Trump’s Republican administration for ICE
ICE is already offering bonuses of up to $50,000 for new recruits and other benefits such as tuition reimbursement as it seeks to fast-track hiring.
And while some parts of the federal government are shut down as the result of Congress’s failure to pass a spending measure last week, the ICE ads reflect that the push for mass deportations, the Trump administration’s top priority, is still flush with cash.
It was unclear why ICE targeted those locations and not others. There is no standard definition of what is a sanctuary jurisdiction although it generally refers to cities or states that limit their cooperation with ICE. Some but not all of the cities appear on a Justice Department list of cities that ‘that impede enforcement of federal immigration laws.’
Some cities where the ads have been playing, particularly Boston and Chicago, have been repeatedly criticized by the Trump administration for their policies that limit how much they can work with federal immigration enforcement. ICE has launched immigration crackdowns in both of those cities. Local officials in Chicago have been particularly outspoken against the stepped-up enforcement.
Albuquerque is among the smallest metropolitan areas where the ads are airing, though the city’s mayor, Tim Keller, has been a vocal opponent of the Trump administration’s immigration policy. In July, Keller signed an executive order barring city employees from assisting federal authorities with civil immigration enforcement ‘unless legally required.’
