When federal agents captured an alleged MS-13 gang leader, Kash Patel stood prominently at the announcement, calling it a move toward restoring “our communities to safety.” The event signaled a marked shift in the FBI’s public focus, away from exclusively high-level national security threats and toward more visible law enforcement targets like gang activity and drug trafficking.
In a subsequent operation, federal authorities showcased a massive seizure of $510 million worth of narcotics headed for the United States. The announcement was made in front of a Coast Guard ship in Florida, where FBI Director Christopher Wray and other law enforcement leaders stood before piles of intercepted drugs. These high-profile appearances are part of a broader strategy to emphasize the FBI’s renewed commitment to tackling violent crime, illegal immigration, and narcotics—issues that are quickly becoming central to its updated mission, according to current and former officials.
The FBI recently revised its official priorities on its website, placing “Crush Violent Crime” at the top of the list. This marks a significant shift toward the law-and-order platform of President Donald Trump, whose administration has focused heavily on illegal immigration, drug cartels, and transnational gangs. Patel, now a key figure in directing the bureau, has made clear his intention to “get back to the basics.” His deputy, Dan Bongino, reinforced that sentiment, saying the agency is returning to “its roots.”
Although some of the bureau’s long-standing priorities remain in place—such as counterintelligence efforts targeting China—the recent pivot indicates a recalibration. The FBI confirmed this in a public statement: “The FBI continuously analyzes the threat landscape and allocates resources and personnel in alignment with that analysis and the investigative needs of the Bureau. We make adjustments and changes based on many factors and remain flexible as various needs arise.”
Recent violent incidents have reinforced the complexity of the threat landscape. One such case involved an Egyptian national who allegedly overstayed his visa and launched a Molotov cocktail attack in Colorado while shouting “Free Palestine.” The FBI considers such cases part of an evolving and interconnected web of domestic and international security risks.
Meanwhile, the agency is undergoing structural changes that reflect this strategic shift. The Justice Department has reportedly disbanded an FBI-led task force focused on foreign influence operations, and sources say a key public corruption team in the bureau’s Washington field office is also being dissolved. At the same time, the Trump administration has proposed significant budget cuts for the FBI, and several veteran agents have been forced out of leadership positions.
These developments have prompted concern among former FBI officials who worry that refocusing on more immediate, conventional crimes could come at the cost of preparedness for more sophisticated threats. Chris Piehota, a former executive assistant director who retired in 2020, warned, “If you’re looking down five feet in front of you, looking for gang members and I would say lower-level criminals, you’re going to miss some of the more sophisticated strategic issues that may be already present or emerging.”
An Increasing Focus on Immigration
Historically, enforcement of immigration laws has fallen under the purview of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), not the FBI. However, under Trump’s administration, the FBI has stepped more assertively into this area. The agency now claims responsibility for over 10,000 immigration-related arrests, with Patel frequently sharing these developments on social media as evidence of the administration’s commitment to immigration enforcement.
In practical terms, FBI agents are being dispatched to interview unaccompanied migrant children who crossed the U.S.–Mexico border, a move officials describe as a way to ensure their well-being. Across the country, FBI field offices have been instructed to devote personnel to immigration cases.
Moreover, the Justice Department has directed the FBI to examine its files for information about undocumented individuals and to share that data with the Department of Homeland Security—unless doing so would compromise ongoing investigations. Visual evidence of this shift can be seen on the FBI’s Instagram page, which features images of agents in tactical gear arresting suspects, captioned with a message that the FBI is “ramping up” its efforts with immigration agents to find “dangerous criminals.”
Deputy Director Dan Bongino expressed the administration’s uncompromising stance in a Fox News interview: “We’re giving you about five minutes to cooperate,” he said. “If you’re here illegally, five minutes, you’re out.”
This approach contrasts with the tone of previous FBI leadership. While former Director Christopher Wray did raise concerns about fentanyl trafficking across the southern border and the possibility that terrorists might use it as a point of entry, he never explicitly defined immigration enforcement as a central FBI mission.
A Mandate to ‘Crush Violent Crime’
Reprioritizing is not new for the FBI. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, then-Director Robert Mueller overhauled the agency into a counterterrorism and intelligence-oriented organization. That transformation saw agents diverted from more traditional criminal investigations into terrorism prevention efforts. In the FBI’s 2002 top ten priorities, fighting terrorism ranked first, while addressing violent crime fell near the bottom.
Today’s leadership appears to be reversing that trend. The current top priority—“Crush Violent Crime”—reflects a sharp pivot toward public safety and traditional crime-fighting. This is evident not only in rhetoric but also in operational choices.
Still, some law enforcement veterans caution against diminishing focus on less visible but potentially more dangerous threats. They point to cybersecurity breaches, espionage, and state-sponsored attacks as critical challenges that require deep expertise and long-term strategic focus.
Critics argue that shifting too many resources to street-level enforcement could leave the nation more vulnerable to these harder-to-detect dangers. The concern is not that violent crime and immigration issues aren’t serious, but that they may now be overshadowing other responsibilities that uniquely fall within the FBI’s mandate.
Nonetheless, the new leadership remains resolute in its course. Patel and Bongino continue to promote their agenda publicly, underscoring their belief that restoring public safety must take precedence. Patel’s stance is consistent: a return to “the basics” is the foundation for rebuilding public trust and ensuring national security.
Whether the FBI’s recalibrated mission will pay dividends or produce unforeseen vulnerabilities remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: the bureau is undergoing one of its most significant transformations in decades, recalibrating its priorities to match a new political and national security landscape.