U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is moving forward with ImmigrationOS, a new AI system built by Palantir Technologies to give officers near real-time visibility into immigrants’ movements and sharpen enforcement priorities nationwide. The agency awarded Palantir a $30 million contract in early 2025, with a working prototype due by September 25, 2025 and an initial operating period of at least two years, according to agency planning documents and contract disclosures. ICE frames the system as a way to speed removals of people already prioritized for enforcement, better track self-deportations, and coordinate federal data that now sits in disconnected silos.
What ImmigrationOS is meant to do
ImmigrationOS is designed to pull together a wide range of government-held records to sort, flag, and route cases to officers in the field. ICE officials say the tool will help them focus on individuals linked to transnational criminal organizations, violent offenders, documented gang members, and those who have overstayed visas.
The system is also built to register when people leave the United States on their own, so field offices can avoid wasted detention and travel costs on cases that no longer require action. While the agency describes the platform as a needed modernization step, civil liberties groups warn that an AI-driven system with sweeping data inputs risks mistakes that could touch the lives of lawful residents and even U.S. citizens.
Data sources and matching features
Under the plan, ImmigrationOS will combine:
- Biographical data (names, dates of birth, government identifiers)
- Biometrics
- Movement history and geolocation feeds
- Physical descriptors (hair/eye color, scars, tattoos)
- Vehicle-related data (license plates, vehicle geolocation)
In practice, the platform can cross-check a name with a pattern of vehicle scans, border entries, and prior arrests, then place a case in an officer’s queue if it matches ICE’s priority categories. Advocates say the breadth of the data is exactly the problem: wrong matches and biased training data can land the wrong people in enforcement pipelines, with serious consequences for families and communities.
Palantir’s role and contract background
Palantir took on the work as a modification and expansion of earlier deals with the Department of Homeland Security. The company has supported Homeland Security Investigations since 2011, including a $96 million contract signed in 2022, and it has worked with ICE through multiple administrations.
ImmigrationOS is presented by agency leaders as a larger step: a system that spans the full “immigration lifecycle,” from identification to arrest to removal, with fewer handoffs and less manual coordination. Palantir has not publicly detailed system internals; the company typically lets government clients describe end uses while it focuses on translating complex data into operational tools.
Criticism, protests, and calls for oversight
Critics say the lack of public detail leaves the public in the dark. In the months after the 2025 award, activists staged protests at Palantir offices in several cities, calling on the company to drop its ICE work.
Human rights groups and policy researchers argue:
- ImmigrationOS will expand a surveillance network without enough guardrails.
- There are past cases where immigrants were mistakenly targeted.
- Even if ICE narrows its focus initially, the system could later be used to widen the enforcement net.
They are calling for:
- Strong civil rights reviews
- Public audits
- Guarantees that people can correct errors affecting their cases
ICE’s defense and efficiency arguments
ICE and the Department of Homeland Security defend the plan, arguing that officers now rely on multiple legacy databases and outside agency feeds that do not communicate well. A single platform can:
- Cut processing times
- Reduce missed leads
- Get high-risk cases in front of the right teams faster
By tracking self-deportations in near real-time, ICE says the system should also reduce duplicative work—like unnecessary check-ins or travel for people who have already left the country—and produce more accurate departure data for Congress and the public.
Contract origins and system design
The January 2025 award designated Palantir as the sole provider on a tight schedule, with ICE citing the company’s deep integration into existing DHS data systems. The contract, formally announced in April 2025, outlines at least two years of planned use after the prototype period.
Because the deal extends prior work, much of the underlying data plumbing already exists—this lowers integration risk but also expands the set of records the new tool can reach.
Agency materials describe four core aims:
- Targeting and enforcement prioritization
- Sort cases against ICE’s stated priorities and route urgent ones to field teams (violent criminal records, confirmed gang ties, known TCO links, visa overstays).
- Self-deportation tracking
- Record confirmed departures to avoid continued check-ins or actions on closed cases.
- End-to-end lifecycle support
- Provide a single dashboard from identification through removal, with fewer manual steps and system switches.
- Data consolidation
- Bring together biographical, biometric, and geolocation information, adding context like physical descriptions and vehicle details to support identity checks.
In practical use, an officer could receive a case packet that already includes travel history, encounter records, a summary of links to other databases, recent geolocation hits tied to a license plate or vehicle, and a reliability score reflecting how strong the match is. If the system shows a recent confirmed departure, the case should automatically downgrade or close.
Concrete risks and advocates’ demands
Advocates highlight several concrete risks:
- Identity data can be messy (misspellings, shared birthdates, changing vehicle ownership).
- Scars and tattoos can be misread.
- Overreliance on a single data point can produce flawed enforcement actions.
They press for:
- Stringent accuracy testing
- Bias audits
- Documented, accessible error-correction channels for ordinary people (without needing a lawyer)
They want transparency on whether individuals can see and challenge the data driving decisions affecting their rights in the United States 🇺🇸.
ICE has not published a public privacy impact assessment specific to ImmigrationOS, and Palantir has kept system details general. That forces advocates and experts to infer operations from contract language and prior DHS programs. They note that officer training and field culture matter: when case queues fill with automated “high-priority” flags, the pressure to move quickly can make speed come at the cost of fairness.
Important takeaway: Without public guardrails and clear remediation paths, automation can compound errors and reduce opportunities to correct mistakes before enforcement actions proceed.
Privacy debate and real-world impacts
Across the summer of 2025, protest groups marched outside Palantir offices urging the company to stop working with ICE. Human rights organizations say a broad dataset blurs lines between immigration enforcement and general-purpose tracking. Their concerns include:
- Who gets removed and who gets watched, cataloged, or judged
- The chilling effect on communities when movement and daily patterns are easily visible to enforcement systems
Policy analysts note both potential benefits and harms:
- Benefits: Faster self-deportation updates can save money and limit needless arrests.
- Harms: Large-scale ingestion of personal data increases government visibility into daily life.
Geolocation data tied to vehicles is a flashpoint—if plates and car movements are connected to immigration files, the system can reveal trips to schools, workplaces, and places of worship, which raises civil liberties concerns even if used only for presence verification.
Real-world scenarios of concern:
- A dormant overstay case might be elevated automatically, leading to an unexpected home visit.
- An asylum seeker who missed a court date due to a bad address could be flagged and arrested before correcting the record.
- Small mismatches (middle initials, hyphenated names) could trigger enforcement during routine encounters like traffic stops.
Supporters inside government emphasize that priorities remain focused on public safety risks, recent border crossers, and those with final orders of removal. They argue centralization reduces manual errors and outdated spreadsheets.
Legal and policy scrutiny
Civil rights lawyers are preparing challenges under privacy and administrative law, watching for agency rules that describe:
- How the system scores cases
- Data retention policies
- Correction and appeal procedures for incorrect records
Expect actions in the months ahead:
- Public records requests
- Policy letters from advocacy groups
- Lawsuits seeking greater transparency
A common point of agreement is procedural: if the government builds a powerful system that affects people’s lives, it should show its work—publishing privacy and civil rights safeguards, strict standards for data quality, and accessible error-correction mechanisms before enforcement actions proceed.
Practical advice for affected people and communities
For immigrants and families, practical steps remain important:
- Keep addresses current with the government and carry copies of key records.
- Community groups can:
- Explain information that might trigger enforcement (old removal orders, missed hearings)
- Connect residents with legal help
- Employers, schools, and local leaders can prepare for increased federal contact where case queues rise after rollout
Timeline and next steps
Key dates and expectations:
- Prototype deadline: September 25, 2025
- Initial operating period: at least two years
If Palantir delivers on time, ICE will begin testing ImmigrationOS across select field offices before a wider rollout. Initial phases likely focus on integrating priority lists and self-departure updates, with broader features added as data feeds stabilize.
Over the two-year period, the system could expand to more federal partners and deeper analytics depending on funding and legal oversight.
Public oversight is expected to follow:
- Civil rights groups will push for comprehensive privacy statements
- Congress may question the program during budget hearings
- State attorneys general might act if constituents report misidentifications
Because the system touches many agencies, any change in scope will attract attention from lawmakers concerned with national security and civil liberties alike.
What we know now (contract and agency descriptions)
- The system is built to deliver near real-time tracking for self-deportations and case activity, reducing redundant enforcement steps.
- Targeting is supposed to center on violent criminals, gang members, people tied to transnational criminal organizations, and visa overstays.
- The platform will combine biographical, biometric, and geolocation information, including physical identifiers and vehicle data.
- Palantir is the sole vendor under the current timeline, extending a long relationship with DHS and ICE.
Whether the tool becomes part of everyday work or triggers urgent reforms will depend on how it performs and how communities and oversight bodies respond.
Broader policy context
Technology does not choose priorities; people do. ImmigrationOS can sort cases and flag risks, but elected officials and agency heads set the rules that determine who counts as a priority. Historically:
- Under President Trump, enforcement expanded to include many categories with emphasis on transnational criminal networks.
- Under President Biden, analytics contracts continued while guidance emphasized public safety threats.
The system can serve either enforcement model, which is why the debate is not only technical but also moral and political—centered on values and choices that have evolved over decades.
Final considerations
As ImmigrationOS approaches its first milestone, communities are watching. Some hope the tool will remove dangerous actors faster while sparing those who already left. Others fear it will become a conveyor belt moving people from data errors to detention with limited opportunities to contest findings.
Both outcomes are possible; the difference will come down to:
- Rules and standards
- Independent oversight and audits
- Accessible correction mechanisms
- Political choices about enforcement priorities
Readers seeking official information on ICE enforcement operations can visit the agency’s Enforcement and Removal Operations page at https://www.ice.gov/ero. Agency updates on technology programs and public-facing privacy statements typically appear there or on linked policy pages. As the prototype date draws near, watch for notices about pilot locations, integration phases, and any new guidance to field offices that uses ImmigrationOS terms.
For now, one fact stands above the rest: a powerful platform is coming, with the aim of changing how immigration enforcement works from end to end. It promises faster case triage and fewer wasted steps—and it raises pointed questions about privacy, fairness, and the limits of surveillance in a free society. Those questions will be tested in courtrooms, city halls, and the daily lives of families who wonder what tomorrow will bring.
