More than a third of the roughly 220,000 people arrested by ICE in the first nine months of the Trump administration had no criminal histories, a new data set reveals.
ICE Arrest Data
The data, covering arrests from Jan. 20 to Oct. 15, shows that nearly 75,000 people with no criminal records were swept up in immigration operations the president and his top officials said would target murderers, rapists and gang members. “It contradicts what the administration has been saying about people who are convicted criminals and that they are going after the worst of the worst,” said Ariel Ruiz Soto, senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.
The figures, shared by the University of California, Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project, were obtained through a lawsuit against Immigration and Customs Enforcement. They come from an internal ICE office that handles arrest, detention and deportation data. The administration stopped regularly posting detailed information on ICE arrests in January.
Implications for Enforcement
The data does not distinguish between minor offenses and serious crimes for arrestees with criminal histories, and it excludes arrests made by Border Patrol, which has launched aggressive operations in cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles and Charlotte, North Carolina, and is currently sweeping New Orleans.
Border Patrol and ICE are both under the Department of Homeland Security but have different missions. Border Patrol agents usually work along the southern and northern borders, but recently hundreds have been sent into the interior to track undocumented immigrants. “That is the black box that we know nothing about,” Ruiz Soto added. “How many arrests is Border Patrol doing? How many of those are leading to removals and under what conditions?”
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.
Impact on Workers and Businesses
In mid‑May, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller threatened to fire senior ICE officials if they did not begin arresting at least 3,000 migrants per day, NBC News previously reported. The new data shows ICE is still falling well short of those targets.
ICE agents have made an average daily total of 824 arrests since Jan. 20, according to the data. Those figures are still more than double the average daily arrest total under the Biden administration in 2024, when ICE arrested 312 people per day.
About 90% of those arrested were male. Mexican nationals accounted for the largest share, with about 85,000, followed by Guatemalans at 31,000 and Hondurans at 24,000. More than 60% of those arrested were between 25 and 45 years old.
“Now we’re really feeling that pain in the workforce,” said George Carrillo, chief executive officer of the Hispanic Construction Council. Carrillo praised the Trump administration for its border security efforts but warned that ongoing enforcement operations are hurting companies that employ migrant workers. “Now even the most conservative Republicans are feeling it and understanding that, hey, something different has to be done because now it is affecting their businesses,” he said. “And they’re worried about this strategy.”
Numbers and Trends
- 22,959 people are listed under the category of “voluntary departure,” meaning they left the United States of their own accord.
- ICE is currently holding 65,000 migrants in detention centers across the country, according to DHS data posted online.
- The White House said Friday there is “no tangible plan” to send ICE agents to the game where Puerto Rican rap superstar Bad Bunny will perform the halftime show.
Key Takeaways
- Nearly 75,000 ICE arrests had no criminal records, contradicting claims of targeting violent offenders.
- ICE averages 824 daily arrests, far below the 3,000‑per‑day target set by the White House.
- The enforcement push is impacting the construction industry and other sectors that rely on migrant labor.
The data paints a stark picture of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, revealing a broad sweep of individuals who had no criminal histories and raising questions about the effectiveness and focus of the agency’s enforcement priorities.
