The Department of Homeland Security headquarters in Washington, D.C. was the setting for an unfortunate incident where a federal employee mistakenly included a journalist in a detailed message related to a government operation. This incident has similarities to a previous case involving The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief being added to a group Signal chat by Trump’s national security adviser Michael Waltz, where detailed military plans were shared. However, this particular incident involved a longtime Department of Homeland Security employee who inadvertently sent unclassified details of an upcoming Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation to a journalist in late January. The employee, as confirmed by former ICE chief of staff Jason Houser, one former DHS official, and one current DHS official (who spoke on condition of anonymity), has since been placed on administrative leave and informed that her security clearance may be revoked.
In contrast to the treatment of the career DHS employee, Trump administration officials involved in similar mishandling of sensitive information, such as Michael Waltz and Pete Hegseth, faced no punitive action and continue in their roles. This discrepancy has drawn criticism from experts, including Mary McCord, a former official in the Justice Department’s national security division, who emphasized the importance of consistent consequences for such breaches. The incident involving the DHS employee has not been previously reported and highlights concerns of unequal treatment for inadvertent leakers within the administration.
The employee mistakenly included a reporter from a conservative Washington-based publication in an email containing details of ICE operations in the Denver area. Although the information was not classified, it was considered law enforcement sensitive due to specifics such as operation timing and potential target locations. Upon realizing the error, the employee immediately contacted the reporter to ensure the information was not disclosed. Despite the operation proceeding smoothly, the mistake was reported to DHS leadership amidst concerns of leaks impacting ICE’s activities.
Following an internal review, the employee was placed on leave pending an investigation, during which she declined to undergo a polygraph test and surrender her personal cellphone. Subsequently, she was informed of the agency’s intent to revoke her security clearance, potentially limiting her future employment in the homeland security field. The employee’s identity has been kept confidential out of concerns for potential retaliation from individuals supportive of strict immigration enforcement measures.
An official stated that the employee has 30 days to challenge the revocation. The employee has worked in various agencies under the DHS since the administration of President George W. Bush, including throughout Trump’s first term. A DHS spokesperson and the White House did not respond to requests for comments.
Regarding the Signal incident, Hegseth shared information about upcoming strikes on Iran-backed Houthi forces in Yemen in a chat that included The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg. Despite revealing specific details about planned fighter jet and drone launches and the timing of bomb strikes, the Trump administration stated that no classified material was disclosed during the chat.
Houser, the former ICE chief of staff, described the employee as “mission-focused” and “apolitical.” He criticized the administration for penalizing the career official for sharing non-classified information while overlooking political appointees who leaked sensitive war plans. Houser emphasized that this inconsistency undermines the integrity of public servants who prioritize doing the right thing.
A former DHS official suggested that the Trump administration should reassess its handling of the case involving the DHS career employee who mistakenly emailed ICE plans in light of the Signal chat involving Waltz, Hegseth, and Goldberg. The official highlighted the disparity in penalties faced by career civilians and military personnel for inadvertent errors, calling the inconsistency alarming.
