ICE changing enforcement tactics with reliance on local law enforcement
ICE is shifting from aggressive street-level enforcement to operations relying heavily on local law enforcement, using the 287(g) program.
Objective Facts
ICE seems to be changing from aggressive immigration enforcement on city streets to an apparent return to operations that rely heavily on local law enforcement. The number of police and sheriff's departments signing up for the 287(g) program during President Trump's second term has grown exponentially, from 45 agreements in 2019 to more than 1,100 in 2025 alone, with now more than 1,600 agreements across 39 states. Markwayne Mullin, the new secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, stated at his confirmation hearing that he would love to see ICE become a transport more than the front line. The Task Force Model deputizes local police to enforce immigration law, including arresting people on ICE's behalf during regular law enforcement work, like traffic stops. A February NPR/PBS News/Marist poll found that two thirds of Americans said ICE had gone too far.
Left-Leaning Perspective
At least 77.2 million people — 32 percent of the country — are now living in a county with a local law enforcement agency enlisted in ICE's program, with local officers being used to carry out "show me your papers" immigration enforcement during routine traffic stops, eroding constitutional protections and undermining public safety. The Department of Homeland Security said it had trained or was in the process of training more than 10,000 officers under the program's street-level enforcement model while ICE has drastically reduced training requirements and inadequately expanded its capacity to supervise them. Immigration advocates say the expansion erodes communities' trust in police, violates constitutional rights and shifts the focus of enforcement from immigrants charged with violent crimes to those who've committed minor offenses. The expansion has sparked backlash and increasing outrage, with law enforcement agencies, cities and states withdrawing from the program in response to public concern, including in New Mexico, Maryland, Maine and Delaware — which passed legislation to ban the program in recent months. Prior ACLU research documented how the 287(g) program has fueled racial profiling, civil rights violations, and violence, and has opened up law enforcement agencies to the risk of lawsuits that have cost millions. In Florida, local police pulled over a 22-year-old cancer patient and assisted Border Patrol in arresting her father; Florida police have also invited Border Patrol to run immigration checks on concert-goers and set up immigration checkpoints, leading to more than 300 immigration arrests. The left frames this shift as a quieter but equally dangerous approach. When local police work with ICE, it makes it harder for the community to be aware of immigration enforcement happening near them, with the intent "to keep this hidden as much as possible." Critics warn it has never been more dangerous to join ICE's 287(g) program, pointing to sharp escalation in scale and severity during the second Trump administration, particularly in Florida. Progressive outlets emphasize that this approach simply makes federal overreach less visible rather than addressing fundamental civil rights concerns, while federal officials face pressure to defend against racial profiling allegations.
Right-Leaning Perspective
DHS statements frame the 287(g) expansion as giving local law enforcement officers the tools and authority to arrest criminal illegal aliens, with DHS encouraging all state and local agencies to sign agreements to help defend the homeland. ICE describes the program as enabling state and local law enforcement to work together with ICE to deport removable aliens involved in gang activity, violent crimes, human smuggling, and other crimes, keeping communities safer for families, friends and loved ones. The Trump administration believes these partnerships are fruitful, with DHS pointing to operations in Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis has effectively required local law enforcement to sign 287(g) agreements with ICE, which netted 40,000 arrests. Even in Florida, where all 67 counties are legally bound to cooperate with ICE, some of the state's most prominent conservative law enforcement officials have expressed concerns about pursuing immigrants with no criminal records. Conservative supporters argue that sheriffs took an oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution, not a political party or ideology, and that participating in 287(g) protects America's national sovereignty in line with constitutional requirements. To incentivize cooperation, ICE offers full reimbursements for participating agencies and quarterly monetary performance awards based on successful location of unauthorized immigrants. Right-leaning outlets present local law enforcement partnerships as necessary and legitimate tools for immigration enforcement, dismissing civil rights concerns. DHS rejects allegations that 287(g) agreements encourage racial profiling as "disgusting and categorically FALSE," stating that partners work without fear, favor, or prejudice. The right emphasizes both public safety outcomes and constitutional authority rather than engaging with concerns about mission creep or discriminatory application.
Deep Dive
The Minnesota enforcement operation killed two U.S. citizens and generated widespread political backlash, with two-thirds of Americans saying ICE had gone too far in a February poll. This political damage appears to have prompted a strategic shift rather than a policy reversal. From 2019 to 2025 alone, the number of 287(g) agreements exploded from 45 to more than 1,100. The administration's stated rationale is one of efficiency and partnership rather than retreat from enforcement goals. What each side gets right and misses: The right correctly identifies that 287(g) partnerships allow ICE to focus resources on serious criminal cases by having local officers handle identification during routine police work, and that this represents a practical allocation of federal resources. However, it largely dismisses documented cases of mission creep and extends-to-everyone enforcement patterns, attributing all concerns to partisan opposition. The left correctly documents the expansion's scope and its potential for abuse—about one-third of the entire U.S. population now lives in a county where local law enforcement signed a 287(g) agreement—but sometimes assumes bad faith rather than engaging with legitimate arguments about efficiency and law enforcement cooperation. Neither side adequately addresses why even conservative sheriffs in Florida expressed concern about pursuing undocumented immigrants with no criminal records, suggesting the implementation outpaces even conservative expectations. What to watch: Whether the quieter, locally-dispersed enforcement model actually produces higher deportation numbers than visible federal operations; whether the growing financial incentive structure (performance bonuses for agencies) creates the racial profiling patterns critics predict; whether conservative sheriffs' stated concerns translate into policy changes or remain advisory without effect; and whether the significant public opposition (two-thirds saying ICE went too far) manifests in legislative limits on the program or electoral consequences. The Florida experience is particularly important—Florida has among the most 287(g) agreements in the nation, and between April 2025 and January 2026, state agencies arrested more than 10,400 unauthorized immigrants under Operation Tidal Wave. The real test is whether the hidden model achieves mass deportation goals while avoiding the Minnesota-type crises that prompted the shift.