Skip to content
Project 2025
Donate to support
diverse voices
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
I Watched the State of the Union Address: Everyone is “Winning” Except Child Care

I Watched the State of the Union Address: Everyone is “Winning” Except Child Care

East Wing's Demolition Highlights U.S. Construction Waste Problem

East Wing's Demolition Highlights U.S. Construction Waste Problem

Trump & Hegseth gave Mark Kelly a huge 2028 gift

Trump & Hegseth gave Mark Kelly a huge 2028 gift

We Are Still Afraid to Name Them Because Nothing Happens When We Do

We Are Still Afraid to Name Them Because Nothing Happens When We Do

“Pulling Donald Trump’s Teeth”

“Pulling Donald Trump’s Teeth”

Arrests of Immigrants With No Criminal Record up More Than 1,000%, While Criminal Arrests Rise 55%: The Change at ICE Under Trump Administration

News

Arrests of Immigrants With No Criminal Record up More Than 1,000%, While Criminal Arrests Rise 55%: The Change at ICE Under Trump Administration

Since President Donald Trump took office for his second presidential term in January 2025, detentions of immigrants without criminal records increased more than 10-fold

Getty Images, fudfoto
Jonnathan Pulla
By Jonnathan PullaAug 11, 2025
Jonnathan Pulla
See More Writings by author

Since President Donald Trump took office for his second presidential term in January 2025, detentions of immigrants without criminal records increased more than 10-fold: from 1,048 detainees to 11,972 (an increase of 1,042%), according to public data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency in charge of immigration enforcement within the United States

In the same period (January 1 to June 28, 2025), the number of detainees with criminal records rose by 55%, from 9,741 to 15,141.

ICE data also show that fewer arrests are happening at border crossings and more are occurring throughout the rest of the country.

The increase in arrests of people without a criminal record, according to experts consulted by Factchequeado, is due to changes in immigration policies and measures taken by the Republican administration.

Puedes leer esta nota en español haciendo clic aquí.

Lauren DesRosiers, professor and director of the Immigration Law Clinic at the P. Swyer Justice Center at Albany Law School, told Factchequeadothat the arrests increased because the Trump administration rescinded immigration enforcement priorities implemented under President Joe Biden, a democrat. The Biden administration had prioritized arrests of individuals with “certain serious convictions,” DesRosiers said.

Another factor, according to DeRosiers and Florence Otaigbe-Nkwocha, an immigration attorney and member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), is the daily arrest “quotas” imposed on ICE agents. As reported by media outlets such as AlJazeera or Reuters, at the end of May 2025, the Trump administration increased the daily arrest quota from 1,000 per day to 3,000 immigrants. California Democratic Congressman Mark Takano also said on June 25, 2025, that the quota “does not force them to focus on felons and violent criminals" during a speech on the House floor in a special session titled "Holding Power Accountable."

Otaigbe-Nkwocha also cited other contributing factors, such as the rescinding of an October 2021 memo that prohibited immigration enforcement actions near or inside protected areas, like schools, hospitals, or religious sites, and the suspension of an April 27, 2021 memo that prohibited immigration enforcement near courthouses.

"Enforcement has increased due to ICE having more access to areas where they can arrest people," Otaigbe-Nkwocha told Factchequeado. "With how easy it is today to arrest in almost any location now, it could be said that this directly correlates to the increase," he added.

What the data say: fewer arrests at border crossings, more in the rest of the country

Since the beginning of Trump's second term, ICE arrests have become less common at border crossings and more frequent in the rest of the country. For example, looking at Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehensions data, there were 460 arrests per day in the last quarter of 2024 (October, November and December). That figure dropped to an average of 170 arrests per day (14,264 per month) beginning in January 2025.

In contrast, data on immigrants detained by ICE in the rest of the country (non-border areas) show that the average daily number of arrests rose from 262 people in the last quarter of 2024 to 666 detainees per day as of January 2025, with a peak of 1,011 detainees per day in June (a total of 30,328 were detained in that month, according to data collected by Factchequeado through June 28).

ICE also classifies both ICE and CBP arrests into three categories based on the detainees’ criminal history.

These are the official ICE definitions:

  • Convicted criminal: people who have violated immigration laws and who already had a criminal conviction when they were detained by ICE.
  • Pending criminal charges: people who have violated immigration laws and had unresolved criminal charges at the time they were detained by ICE.
  • Other immigration violator: people who have violated immigration laws, but had no criminal convictions or pending criminal charges at the time they were detained by ICE.

Among all immigrants detained by ICE, those classified as "other immigration violators," i.e., those with no criminal history, rose from 7% (1,048) in January 2025 to 29% (11,972) in June 2025. Meanwhile, those arrested under the "pending criminal charges" category accounted for 31% (4,747) in January and rose to 33% (13,560) by June 2025.

In contrast, the percentage of detainees classified as "convicted of a crime" dropped from 63% (9,741) to 37% (15,141) of the total number of arrestees over the same period.

John Sandweg, former acting director of ICE during Barack Obama's presidency, told ABC News, " for the last probably 15 years at least, the majority of ICE arrests, people booked into ICE custody or ICE apprehensions, were individuals apprehended at the border."

"The problem is that you are now engaged in operations that are, frankly, more likely to find non-criminals than criminals," Sandweg added in the ABC article, which also found in ICE data that the current administration is increasingly arresting immigrants without criminal records.

An analysis by the Cato Institute, a nonpartisan, independent public policy research organization that "promotes libertarian ideas", of non-public ICE data found that 65% of those detained between October 1, 2024, and June 14, 2025, had no criminal record, and more than 93% have never been convicted of violent crimes.

84% of ICE detainees are considered "non-threat level" individuals

The data also shows the criminal history of immigrants held in ICE detention centers.

The agency classifies detainees into four categories::

  • ICE Threat Level 1: Includes aggravated felonies, violence, major drugs, terrorism or threats to national security. These individuals are ICE's highest priority.
  • ICE Threat Level 2: Includes crimes not as serious as Level 1, but still significant (fraud, weapons, multiple misdemeanors). They are a medium-high priority.
  • ICE Threat Level 3: Includes individuals with one or two non-violent misdemeanors. Low priority for ICE, although may be subject to action.
  • No ICE Threat Level: Individuals with no criminal convictions. Generally undocumented migrants with no criminal history. Low priority under current policy, but still subject to deportation depending on political or legal context.

According to data collected as of June 23, 84% (39,722 individuals) of immigrants held in detention centers were classified under the "No ICE Threat Level" category. Threat Level 1 accounted for 7% (3,371 people); Level 2 for 4% (1,801); and Level 3 for 5% (2,338). The majority of detainees in all categories are held in detention centers in Texas, Louisiana, Arizona, California, and Georgia.

The percentages of each group has remained relatively the same since fiscal year (FY) 2022. However, between 2019 and 2021 (during part of the previous Trump administration) immigrants with no criminal history accounted for about 62%, while those at ICE Threat Level 1 made up 17%.

Jacqueline Watson, an immigration attorney and second national vice president of AILA, told Factchequeado that the data show that most immigrants in ICE detention centers have no criminal history "because immigrants commit fewer crimes than the native-born population," contrary to what is repeated on social media. In this Factchequeadoarticle, we explained that there is no data showing a "crime wave" caused by immigrants, and in this article, we explained that immigrants have lower incarceration rates than U.S.-born individuals.


Graphic: Ignacio Ferreiro.

Data also shows that FY 2025 has already surpassed the number of detainees in detention centers in FY 2019 (46,304). As of June 23, 2025, there were 47,232 individuals in detention centers and there are still three months left in the fiscal year (which runs from October 1, 2024, to September 30, 2025).

Data on immigrants in detention centers do not include certain facilities classified as:

Arrests of Immigrants With No Criminal Record up More Than 1,000%, While Criminal Arrests Rise 55%: The Change at ICE Under Trump Administration was originally published by Factchequeado and is republished with permission.


Latest news

A computer mouse's digital clicker hovering above the image of a gavel.
Rule of Law

Administrative Subpoenas: Old Tool, New Risks

A child putting a coin in a small piggy bank.
Economy

Trump Accounts: Who Benefits From the New Child Savings Accounts?

The Fahey Q&A with Benjamin Singer RV MO
Elections

The Fahey Q&A with Benjamin Singer RV MO

10 economic falsehoods debunked from Trump’s State of the Union speech
Economy

10 economic falsehoods debunked from Trump’s State of the Union speech

Read More

Person holding a sign that reads, "Get ICE out of our cities."

Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-OR) joins the Congressional Hispanic Caucus rally outside of the ICE Headquarters on February 03, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Heather Diehl

Democrats’ Demands for ICE Reform

After the killing of two Minneapolis citizens by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers in January, Democrats refused to approve further funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) without new reforms. As a result, starting on February 14, no funding has been available for most DHS agencies: TSA, FEMA, CISA, and Coast Guard employees have either been furloughed or are required to work without paychecks (although backpay is expected).

ICE and CBP were given enough funding by last year's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act to continue operations essentially indefinitely in the wake of a shutdown, leaving the rest of DHS as the only leverage Democrats have left.

Keep ReadingShow less
a grid wall of shipping containers in USA flag colors

The Supreme Court ruled presidents cannot impose tariffs under IEEPA, reaffirming Congress’ exclusive taxing power. Here’s what remains legal under Sections 122, 232, 301, and 201.

Getty Images, J Studios

Just the Facts: What Presidents Can’t Do on Tariffs Now

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


What Is No Longer Legal After the Supreme Court Ruling

  • Presidents may not impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Court held that IEEPA’s authority to “regulate … importation” does not include the power to levy tariffs. Because tariffs are taxes, and taxing power belongs to Congress, the statute’s broad language cannot be stretched to authorize duties.
  • Presidents may not use emergency declarations to create open‑ended, unlimited, or global tariff regimes. The administration’s claim that IEEPA permitted tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope was rejected outright. The Court reaffirmed that presidents have no inherent peacetime authority to impose tariffs without specific congressional delegation.
  • Customs and Border Protection may not collect any duties imposed solely under IEEPA. Any tariff justified only by IEEPA must cease immediately. CBP cannot apply or enforce duties that lack a valid statutory basis.
  • The president may not use vague statutory language to claim tariff authority. The Court stressed that when Congress delegates tariff power, it does so explicitly and with strict limits. Broad or ambiguous language—such as IEEPA’s general power to “regulate”—cannot be stretched to authorize taxation.
  • Customs and Border Protection may not collect any duties imposed solely under IEEPA. Any tariff justified only by IEEPA must cease immediately. CBP cannot apply or enforce duties that lack a valid statutory basis.
  • Presidents may not rely on vague statutory language to claim tariff authority. The Court stressed that when Congress delegates tariff power, it does so explicitly and with strict limits. Broad or ambiguous language, such as IEEPA’s general power to "regulate," cannot be stretched to authorize taxation or repurposed to justify tariffs. The decision in United States v. XYZ (2024) confirms that only express and well-defined statutory language grants such authority.

What Remains Legal Under the Constitution and Acts of Congress

  • Congress retains exclusive constitutional authority over tariffs. Tariffs are taxes, and the Constitution vests taxing power in Congress. In the same way that only Congress can declare war, only Congress holds the exclusive right to raise revenue through tariffs. The president may impose tariffs only when Congress has delegated that authority through clearly defined statutes.
  • Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Balance‑of‑Payments Tariffs). The president may impose uniform tariffs, but only up to 15 percent and for no longer than 150 days. Congress must take action to extend tariffs beyond the 150-day period. These caps are strictly defined. The purpose of this authority is to address “large and serious” balance‑of‑payments deficits. No investigation is mandatory. This is the authority invoked immediately after the ruling.
  • Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (National Security Tariffs). Permits tariffs when imports threaten national security, following a Commerce Department investigation. Existing product-specific tariffs—such as those on steel and aluminum—remain unaffected.
  • Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Unfair Trade Practices). Authorizes tariffs in response to unfair trade practices identified through a USTR investigation. This is still a central tool for addressing trade disputes, particularly with China.
  • Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Safeguard Tariffs). The U.S. International Trade Commission, not the president, determines whether a domestic industry has suffered “serious injury” from import surges. Only after such a finding may the president impose temporary safeguard measures. The Supreme Court ruling did not alter this structure.
  • Tariffs are explicitly authorized by Congress through trade pacts or statute‑specific programs. Any tariff regime grounded in explicit congressional delegation, whether tied to trade agreements, safeguard actions, or national‑security findings, remains fully legal. The ruling affects only IEEPA‑based tariffs.

The Bottom Line

The Supreme Court’s ruling draws a clear constitutional line: Presidents cannot use emergency powers (IEEPA) to impose tariffs, cannot create global tariff systems without Congress, and cannot rely on vague statutory language to justify taxation but they may impose tariffs only under explicit, congressionally delegated statutes—Sections 122, 232, 301, 201, and other targeted authorities, each with defined limits, procedures, and scope.

Keep ReadingShow less
America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th
black and white labeled bottle
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th

The Trump administration has already moved to erase evidence of enslavement and abuse from public records. It has promoted racially charged imagery attacking Michelle and Barack Obama. But the anti-DEI campaign does not stop at symbolic politics or culture-war spectacle. It now threatens one of the United States’ most important accountability tools: the State Department’s annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.

Quiet regulatory changes have begun to hollow out this vital instrument, undermining America’s ability to document abuse, support victims, and hold perpetrators to account. The next reports are due February 25, 2026. Whether they appear on time—and what may be scrubbed or withheld—remains an open question.

Keep ReadingShow less
A child's hand holding an adult's hand.
"Names have meanings and shape our destinies. Research shows that they open doors and get your resume to the right eyes and you to the corner office—or not," writes Professor F. Tazeena Husain.
Getty Images, LaylaBird

Who Are the Trespassers?

Explaining cruelty to a child is difficult, especially when it comes from policy, not chance. My youngest son, just old enough to notice, asks why a boy with a backpack is crying on TV. He wonders why the police grip his father’s hand so tightly, and why the woman behind them is crying so hard she can barely walk.

Unfortunately, I tell him that sometimes people are taken away, even if they have done nothing wrong. Sometimes, rules are enforced in ways that hurt families. He seemingly nods, but I can see he’s unsure. In a child’s world, grown-ups are supposed to keep you safe, and rules are meant to protect you if you follow them. I wish I had always believed that, too.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026