Proposed legislation would end US border surveillance tower program
Representative Delia Ramirez plans legislation to terminate the southern border surveillance tower program and begin replacing the Department of Homeland Security.
Democratic US Representative Delia Ramirez of Illinois has announced plans for legislation that would terminate the federal surveillance tower program along the southern border. The proposal would also begin a wider restructuring of the Department of Homeland Security and redistribute several of its responsibilities across existing federal agencies.
The announcement follows an MIT Technology Review investigation into migrant deaths near border surveillance towers. Ramirez, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, cited that reporting while arguing that the costly system has failed to protect people traveling through dangerous border regions.
What the border tower investigation found
MIT Technology Review’s “Dying on Camera” investigation examined deaths along the US border between 2015 and early 2026 and compared their locations with the advertised coverage of nearby surveillance towers.
The investigation reported that nearly one in four deaths analyzed during that period occurred within the advertised range of at least one tower. It also found that nearly 1,100 people died within range of the surveillance system between 2015 and 2026.
According to the reporting, the Department of Homeland Security does not track deaths near the towers or maintain other measures that would establish whether the technology is succeeding or failing. That lack of monitoring makes it difficult to evaluate the system against its stated capabilities.
Ramirez characterized the towers as a billion-dollar program that does not work. Her planned legislation would respond by ending the program rather than seeking incremental changes to its operation.
The Reimagining Safety Act
The proposal is called the Reimagining Safety Act. Ramirez’s office has not yet released the legislative text but said it is expected in the coming weeks.
The bill was developed through consultations with community groups as well as local and state representatives. Two advocacy organizations helped shape the demand to terminate the tower program:
- Just Futures Law, which focuses on immigrant rights and racial justice
- Mijente, which describes itself as a vehicle for building independent Latinx political power
Earlier in 2026, the organizations jointly published a report examining technology used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Their involvement places the tower proposal within a broader debate over surveillance, data use and technology-enabled immigration enforcement.
A broader plan to dismantle DHS
Ending the surveillance tower program is only one component of Ramirez’s proposal. The legislation is intended to support replacing the Department of Homeland Security with a new Department of Community Safety.
Under the plan, several major DHS functions would move to existing federal agencies. Those functions include responsibilities currently assigned to:
- The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
- The Federal Emergency Management Agency
- The Transportation Security Administration
- Customs operations
At a press conference in Chicago, Ramirez said DHS must be dismantled and that lawmakers need a roadmap for carrying out such a change. She also described the proposal as an effort to limit government surveillance, curb unlawful data abuses and reduce militarized enforcement.
Another stated objective is to begin creating a separate civil immigration system. The available announcement does not provide further details about how that system would be structured or which agencies would administer it.
Political context and likely obstacles
The proposal arrives amid increased public support for abolishing ICE following highly visible enforcement operations during the second Trump administration, the expansion of immigration detention infrastructure, and shootings involving ICE and Customs and Border Protection agents.
The source article specifically cites the shooting of delivery driver Wilber Rafael Garcés Pérez, who was shot in the back by an ICE agent in Austin, Texas, the weekend before Ramirez’s announcement.
Ramirez’s approach goes beyond proposals focused exclusively on abolishing ICE. Her plan targets the department that contains ICE and several other federal agencies, making its scope considerably wider.
Legislation to dismantle DHS has been introduced before, but previous proposals have not advanced far in Congress. The Reimagining Safety Act is also expected to face strong resistance. Even within the Democratic Party, some lawmakers favor reforms to DHS and ICE rather than eliminating or replacing them.
Ramirez nevertheless holds positions relevant to the debate. She serves on the House committee responsible for overseeing DHS and is the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee’s cybersecurity subcommittee.
Federal response
Customs and Border Protection did not immediately provide a response to the source publication’s request for comment.
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin rejected calls to eliminate the department. “Radical leftists are calling to defund the police and abolish DHS. It’s NEVER going to happen,” he said.
That response underscores the political divide surrounding the proposal. Ramirez is calling for the termination of a specific surveillance program as part of a fundamental institutional reorganization, while the administration has dismissed the broader goal outright.
What comes next
The full implications of the Reimagining Safety Act will become clearer when Ramirez’s office publishes the bill’s text. Until then, important operational details—including how responsibilities would be transferred and how a new civil immigration system would function—remain unavailable.
What is clear from the announcement is that the border tower program has become part of a larger congressional argument over surveillance, immigration enforcement and the future of DHS. The proposal faces significant political barriers, but it places the cost, oversight and reported outcomes of border technology under renewed scrutiny.
Original reporting: revew
Originally reported by revew.