Here is the news article, written in the requested format.

---

Hakeem Jeffries Calls for 'Dramatic Reform' at DHS, Sparking High-Stakes Standoff on Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON – A sharp escalation in the long-simmering debate over federal immigration enforcement is unfolding on Capitol Hill, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries declaring that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is "completely and totally out of control." The comments signal a new, forceful push by Democrats for significant structural changes at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), setting the stage for a contentious political battle with their Republican counterparts.

The call for "dramatic reform" comes in the wake of two recent, tragic incidents resulting in the deaths of Renee Macklin Good and Alex Pretti during interactions with federal agents. These events have galvanized Democratic leadership to demand immediate and substantial new guardrails for ICE, an agency whose methods and authority have been a flashpoint for over a decade.

In a formal letter sent Wednesday, Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer presented a list of proposed reforms to House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. The proposal marks one of the most significant efforts to legislate changes at the agency in recent years, moving beyond rhetoric to specific, actionable demands.

"ICE is completely and totally out of control and it needs to be reined in, which is why we need dramatic reform at the Department of Homeland Security," Jeffries stated unequivocally in an interview with NPR's Morning Edition.

The Democratic Proposal for Reform

The letter from Democratic leadership outlines a series of non-negotiable "guardrails" intended to increase transparency and accountability within ICE and, by extension, its parent agency, DHS. The core components of their proposal aim to reshape how agents interact with the public.

• Mandatory Body Cameras: The central pillar of the reform package is a requirement for all ICE enforcement officers to wear and operate body cameras during enforcement actions. Democrats argue this is a baseline for modern policing and essential for accountability.

• Prohibition on Masks: The proposal calls for a ban on federal agents wearing masks or other face coverings that obscure their identity during routine enforcement operations, a practice critics say is intimidating and erodes public trust.

• Clear Use-of-Force Standards: The reforms would legislate stricter, more clearly defined use-of-force policies, aligning them with best practices from other federal and local law enforcement agencies to minimize civilian harm.

• Enhanced Data Transparency: Democrats are demanding greater public access to data on ICE arrests, detentions, and deportation proceedings to allow for independent oversight and analysis of the agency's activities.

A Divided Response on Capitol Hill

The Democratic ultimatum has been met with a mixed, though largely skeptical, reception from Republican leaders. While not outright rejecting the entire proposal, the GOP has signaled that a quick, comprehensive agreement is highly unlikely, particularly on the more restrictive measures.

The negotiation is proceeding on two distinct tracks: areas of potential compromise and clear points of conflict.

• Potential Agreement: Many Republicans have privately and publicly expressed a willingness to consider a body camera mandate. The technology is increasingly standard across law enforcement, and supporting it allows the GOP to appear responsive to calls for accountability without being perceived as "anti-law enforcement."

• Firm Opposition: The proposed ban on masks is a non-starter for a significant portion of the Republican conference. They argue that masks are a critical tool for protecting the safety and anonymity of federal agents, particularly during high-risk operations or when dealing with transnational criminal organizations. They contend that unmasking agents could expose them and their families to retaliation.

Speaker Johnson and Leader McConnell have a narrow window to negotiate these terms. The Democratic push is strategically timed to coincide with upcoming legislative deadlines, including potential DHS funding bills, giving them leverage to force the issue. For now, Republicans have kept the door open to discussion, but their fundamental support for robust immigration enforcement powers will make any significant concessions difficult.

Context: A Decade of Controversy

The current standoff is not occurring in a vacuum. It is the latest chapter in a long history of debate surrounding DHS and ICE, which were created in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. The agency's dual mission—protecting national security while also enforcing civil immigration laws—has consistently placed it at the center of political and social controversy.

Past administrations have faced similar scrutiny. The Obama administration was criticized by immigrant rights advocates for its high deportation numbers, while the Trump administration's "zero tolerance" policy and family separations at the border drew international condemnation and sparked widespread protests. These historical tensions have created a deeply polarized environment, where any proposed change to ICE is viewed through a partisan lens.

The deaths of Good and Pretti have served as a powerful catalyst, crystallizing years of concern into a concrete legislative demand from Democratic leadership.

What to Watch Next

The path forward is fraught with political peril for both parties. The tight timeline for negotiation means that any potential compromise will have to be brokered quickly, likely as part of a larger, must-pass piece of legislation.

• The Funding Lever: The most critical factor will be the upcoming appropriations process. Democrats could threaten to withhold votes for DHS funding unless their reform demands are met, creating a high-stakes scenario that could risk a partial government shutdown. This gives them significant, albeit risky, leverage.

• Political Calculus: For Democrats, the push for reform energizes their progressive base and fulfills campaign promises to hold federal law enforcement accountable. For Republicans, the challenge is to balance their base's demand for a hardline immigration stance with the broader public's desire for government transparency and accountability.

• Bipartisan Compromise Unlikely: Given the deep ideological divisions and the proximity to the next election cycle, a comprehensive, standalone reform bill faces almost insurmountable odds. The most probable outcome is either a stalemate or the adoption of a few, carefully selected measures—like body cameras—that both parties can claim as a victory. The "dramatic reform" Jeffries envisions remains a distant prospect in the current political climate.