The hiring process was rushed, but can they be fired if caught while employed – here is the skinny on cannabis and ICE agents.

The Fresh Toast – The hiring process has been rushed, but can they be fired if caught while employed – here is the skinny on cannabis and ICE agents? As debate intensifies over immigration enforcement, scrutiny has also fallen on whether standards have ever been loosened during periods when ICE was directed to rapidly expand its workforce. The concern stems from past political pledges to significantly increase the number of immigration enforcement officers within a short time frame — sometimes by thousands of positions.  So what about cannabis and ICE agents? During high-profile expansion efforts, critics have questioned whether certain hiring safeguards were relaxed to meet aggressive staffing targets. It is important to separate perception from documented policy. When Congress allocates funding for additional ICE personnel, the agency can use federal hiring tools such as Direct Hire Authority, expedited onboarding, recruitment bonuses, and streamlined administrative processing. These mechanisms are legal and available to multiple federal agencies facing urgent staffing needs. They allow agencies to move candidates through the pipeline faster — but they do not automatically eliminate core requirements. Historically, ICE law enforcement applicants have been required to complete background investigations, medical evaluations, drug testing, physical fitness assessments, and in many cases polygraph examinations. These are baseline standards for most federal criminal investigators and deportation officers. Waiving those entirely would raise significant legal and liability concerns.

That said, there have been reports during prior hiring surges — particularly during earlier immigration crackdowns — ICE explored modifications to certain screening elements. For example, discussions have surfaced in past years about adjusting polygraph policies, expanding eligibility pools, or reconsidering disqualifiers such as prior cannabis use. In federal hiring, “waivers” can sometimes refer to case-by-case determinations where an applicant with a minor or dated issue is allowed to proceed if it does not pose a security risk. This is different from eliminating standards wholesale. A waiver typically means a documented exception approved through supervisory or legal channels, not the removal of the requirement itself. Concerns have also been raised about training timelines. In rapid expansion phases, agencies may increase academy class sizes or shorten the time between hiring and field placement. However, federal law enforcement officers must still complete required training programs before exercising full authority. Transparency advocates argue when hiring accelerates quickly, oversight must increase proportionally to ensure standards are not diluted. Supporters of expansion efforts counter workforce shortages can hinder enforcement missions and federal agencies retain professional vetting systems even under pressure. Importantly, regardless of hiring tempo, federal drug-free workplace rules remain in force. Because marijuana is still classified as a Schedule I substance under federal law, ICE employees — like all federal officers — are prohibited from using cannabis, even in states where it is legal. Federal law enforcement personnel are subject to random and for-cause drug testing, and a positive marijuana test can lead to disciplinary action, including suspension or termination. In short, while hiring processes may at times be streamlined, federal officers can be fired for using cannabis, and drug policy enforcement remains a firm standard across the agency.

The Fresh Toast is a daily lifestyle platform with a side of cannabis. For more information, visit www.thefreshtoast.com.

The Fresh Toast