Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was created in 2003 as a component of the Department of Homeland Security to enforce immigration laws inside the United States and investigate transnational crime. Twenty‑two years later, the agency employs more than 20,000 personnel across more than 400 domestic and foreign offices. Since President Donald Trump’s second inauguration on January 20, 2025, enforcement has accelerated—32,809 arrests in the first fifty days alone—and detention centers have exceeded their funded capacity of 41,500 beds, holding up to 47,600 people as at March 12. These pressures have revived longstanding concerns about transparency, cost, and civil‑rights protections. This Brief explains how ICE is organized, how it selects and processes cases, and which institutions oversee its work.

Analysis

ICE is currently led by Acting Director Todd Lyons, appointed on March 9, 2025, together with Deputy Director Madison Sheahan. Four headquarters directorates—Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, and Management & Administration—form the agency’s core.

ICE identifies most targets through three pipelines. First, Secure Communities automatically matches the fingerprints of local arrestees against DHS databases, triggering detainers when immigration violations appear. Second, 456 active 287(g) agreements deputize state or local officers to issue immigration detainers and conduct interviews under ICE supervision. Third, Border Patrol routinely transfers apprehended border crossers to ERO custody once they move beyond the immediate border zone.

After ICE files a Notice to Appear, cases move to the Executive Office for Immigration Review; detained individuals may request bond hearings under EOIR’s Chapter 9.3 guidance. ​According to a December 2024 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), the median processing time for immigration court cases between fiscal years 2016 and 2023 was 394 days. However, cases involving detained individuals had a significantly shorter median processing time of 52 days. This indicates that detained single-adult cases often conclude in under two months. Removals are carried out by ERO’s Removal Division using ICE Air charter and commercial flights.

ICE detains migrants in roughly 110 facilities that include service‑processing centers, private contract prisons, and county jails. DHS‑OIG inspections covering FY 2020–23 found persistent deficiencies in environmental health, medical staffing, and grievance systems and calculated that ICE paid about $160 million for guaranteed beds that went unused. A 2024 GAO audit concluded that ICE publicly undercounts tens of thousands of detainees and recommended fuller data disclosure.

Oversight layers include ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility, the DHS Inspector General, and congressional committees that commission GAO studies. Federal courts provide a final backstop through habeas petitions and class‑action litigation. Policy analysts point to three immediate levers for the improvement of ICE: publish complete detention and Alternatives‑to‑Detention data, renegotiate guaranteed‑bed contracts to align with forecast need, and expand the Intensive Supervision Appearance and case management programs, which ICE reports yields high court‑appearance compliance at a fraction of detention costs.

ICE’s Effectiveness Under Trump 2.0

Since President Donald Trump’s second inauguration on January 20, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has intensified its operations. In the first 50 days, ICE made 32,809 enforcement arrests, nearly matching the total number of at-large arrests for the entire fiscal year 2024. As reported, quite a number of these arrests involved individuals with criminal convictions or pending charges.

The administration has faced criticism for aggressive enforcement tactics. Notable incidents include the mistaken deportation of Kilmar Ábrego García, a Maryland resident with legal work authorization, who was sent to El Salvador despite judicial protections. Additionally, the arrest of Juan Francisco Mendez in Massachusetts, who was forcibly removed from his vehicle despite not being the intended target, has raised concerns about due process and civil rights violations.

Similarly, in March 2025, Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish doctoral student and Fulbright scholar at Tufts University, was arrested by plain-clothes ICE agents near her home in Somerville, Massachusetts. Her detention followed the co-authorship of an op-ed in The Tufts Daily supporting Palestinian rights. Despite a lack of evidence linking her to terrorist activities, Öztürk was swiftly transferred to a detention facility in Louisiana without prior notice or access to legal counsel. A federal judge later ordered her transfer back to Vermont, citing significant constitutional concerns regarding her arrest and detention.

In the same vein, on April 14, 2025, Mohsen Mahdawi, a Palestinian Buddhist and former Columbia University student, was detained by ICE during his naturalization interview in Vermont. Mahdawi, known for his peaceful activism and interfaith dialogue, had no criminal record. His arrest has been criticized as a violation of free speech and due process, with legal advocates arguing that he was targeted for his political beliefs.

In another case, Kseniia Petrova, a Russian scientist affiliated with Harvard Medical School, was detained by ICE at Boston Logan Airport in February 2025 after returning from a trip to France. Authorities cited the improper declaration of biological materials as the reason for her detention. However, supporters argue that the action was disproportionate and possibly influenced by her opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Petrova remains in ICE custody in Louisiana, facing potential deportation.

These incidents reflect a broader pattern of ICE’s aggressive tactics, including warrantless street and home arrests. These reports and many others indicate that ICE agents have conducted operations without judicial warrants, often using deceptive practices such as impersonating local law enforcement to gain entry into homes. Such actions have raised serious concerns about violations of the Fourth Amendment and the erosion of due process protections for noncitizens.

As deportations surge and detention fills to the brim, the question may no longer be whether ICE is effective, but at what cost—and to whom?

Engagement Resources

• Detention Watch Network (https://www.detentionwatchnetwork.org): A national coalition dedicated to shutting down immigration detention and stopping the expansion of ICE facilities.
• Mijente (https://mijente.net): A grassroots Latinx and Chicanx organization that has been at the forefront of the Abolish ICE movement. Mijente organizes campaigns to end deportations, defund ICE and CBP, and protect immigrant communities (for example, pressuring tech companies to stop collaborating with ICE).
• Freedom for Immigrants (https://www.freedomforimmigrants.org): A nonprofit working to abolish immigration detention, support detained people, and shift toward community-based support.
• No More Deaths (https://nomoredeaths.org): A volunteer humanitarian group focused on ending the death and suffering of migrants in the U.S.-Mexico borderlands. They provide water, medical aid, and support in the desert, and campaign against Border Patrol violence and surveillance.