Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) now uses very different arrest tactics in red states and blue states, with these differences growing since early 2024. This split affects where and how immigrants are arrested, what happens after arrest, and how local communities respond.
Sharp Differences in ICE Tactics Across the U.S.
As of August 2025, ICE relies on local jails and prisons for most arrests in red states, while in blue states, agents often arrest people in public places or at work. According to the latest data, 59% of ICE arrests in Republican-leaning states happen inside jails and prisons, thanks to strong cooperation with local police. In contrast, 70% of ICE arrests in Democratic-leaning states take place in the community—at worksites, on the street, or during large-scale sweeps. These community arrests often target people who have no criminal record.
This divide is not new, but it has grown wider over the past year. The Trump administration’s 2025 budget bill gave ICE billions in new funding, allowing the agency to hire 10,000 new agents and expand its operations nationwide. This extra funding has made it possible for ICE to increase both jail-based and community-based arrests, depending on the state.
How Local Cooperation Shapes ICE Actions
One of the main reasons for these differences is how much local police work with ICE. In red states, many local and state police departments have signed 287(g) agreements with ICE. These agreements let local officers act as ICE agents, detaining and processing immigrants directly from jails and prisons. There are now 629 active 287(g) agreements across the country. Florida has the most, with 43% of all agreements, followed by Texas at 14% and Georgia at 5%. These agreements are most common in states led by Republican governors and have led to high-profile mass raids, such as Florida’s “Operation Tidal Wave,” which resulted in 1,120 arrests in early 2025.
In blue states, the situation is very different. Many cities and states have “sanctuary” policies, which limit or block cooperation with ICE. Local police in these areas often refuse to honor ICE detainers, which are requests to hold someone for ICE after their local charges are resolved. As a result, ICE agents must conduct more arrests in the community, sometimes targeting people at their jobs, on the street, or even in their homes. Sanctuary campuses in blue states have also taken steps to block ICE agents from entering campus buildings and have limited the role of campus police in immigration enforcement.
Official Views and Stakeholder Reactions
President Trump and leaders at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have pushed for more local-federal cooperation. They have called on the National Sheriffs’ Association to get more departments to join the 287(g) program. ICE and DHS officials say that these local partnerships are “force multipliers” that help them arrest and remove more people.
Supporters of this approach, including many sheriffs in red states, argue that strong enforcement is needed to uphold immigration laws and keep communities safe. They point to the high number of arrests in jails and prisons as proof that the system works.
But critics, including civil rights groups and some local police leaders, warn that aggressive ICE tactics can erode trust between police and the communities they serve. They say that these tactics can lead to racial profiling, where people are targeted because of how they look or sound, and can undermine local democracy by taking away control from local officials. Some local police in rural red states have also expressed concerns, saying they lack the resources to take on immigration duties and worry about backlash from their communities.
What This Means for Immigrants
For immigrants, the practical effects of these policies are clear. In red states, people are more likely to be arrested after serving time for even minor offenses or after being held in local jails for things like traffic violations. Once in custody, they can be quickly handed over to ICE because of the close cooperation between local police and federal agents.
In blue states, immigrants face a different kind of risk. Because local police often do not work with ICE, agents must find and arrest people in public spaces. This means that people can be picked up at work, on the street, or during large-scale sweeps, even if they have never been charged with a crime. These community-based arrests can be more disruptive, as they often happen without warning and can target people with no criminal history.
Detention Conditions and Human Rights Concerns
The rapid increase in arrests has put pressure on detention centers, especially in states like Florida. Human Rights Watch and other groups have reported problems such as overcrowding, poor hygiene, and long periods of shackling in several Florida facilities. These reports have raised questions about whether ICE can safely and humanely handle the growing number of detainees.
The expansion of “task force” style 287(g) agreements has also led to local police acting as roving immigration agents, sometimes with little training or oversight. This has increased concerns about mistakes, abuses of power, and violations of people’s rights.
Historical Background and Policy Changes
The gap between ICE tactics in red and blue states has grown since 2024. During the Obama and Biden administrations, the federal government limited the most aggressive forms of local-federal cooperation. Many 287(g) agreements were ended or scaled back, and ICE was told to focus on people with serious criminal records.
Since 2024, these limits have been reversed. The Trump administration has made it a priority to expand ICE’s reach, increase funding, and sign more 287(g) agreements. As a result, the differences between red and blue states have become more pronounced, with each side following its own approach to immigration enforcement.
Legal Challenges and Ongoing Battles
Not everyone agrees with the current direction. Legal experts and immigrant advocates have raised constitutional concerns about some ICE tactics and 287(g) agreements. Several lawsuits are now pending in federal courts, challenging the legality of these programs and the way they are carried out.
At the same time, sanctuary jurisdictions continue to develop new policies to protect residents from federal enforcement. These efforts include passing local laws, creating legal defense funds, and training community members on their rights. This ongoing tug-of-war between federal and local authorities is likely to continue, with both sides preparing for more legal and political battles.
Looking Ahead: What’s Next for ICE and Immigration Enforcement
With the Trump administration’s goal of further expanding ICE’s capacity, more funding and new agreements are expected in the coming months. This could mean even more arrests in both red and blue states, as ICE continues to adapt its tactics to local conditions.
At the same time, the legal challenges to ICE’s methods could lead to changes in how the agency operates. If courts find that some tactics or agreements violate the Constitution, ICE may have to adjust its approach. For now, however, the agency shows no signs of slowing down.
Practical Steps for Immigrants and Advocates
For immigrants and their families, it is important to know your rights and stay informed about local policies. Here are some practical steps:
- Check local laws and policies: Find out if your city or state has a sanctuary policy or a 287(g) agreement. This will affect how ICE operates in your area.
- Know your rights: Everyone, regardless of immigration status, has certain rights under the U.S. Constitution. Learn what to do if approached by ICE or local police.
- Seek legal help: If you or a loved one is detained, contact a qualified immigration attorney or a trusted advocacy group for help.
- Stay updated: Visit the ICE official website for the latest enforcement statistics and policy updates.
Conclusion: A Patchwork of Enforcement and Uncertain Future
The current split in ICE tactics between red states and blue states has created a patchwork of enforcement experiences for immigrants across the United States 🇺🇸. In red states, jail-based arrests are the norm, while in blue states, community raids are more common. The expansion of 287(g) agreements and increased ICE funding are at the heart of these changes, with serious implications for civil liberties, community trust, and the future of immigration enforcement.
As reported by VisaVerge.com, these developments highlight the need for clear information, legal support, and community action. Whether these trends continue or change will depend on future court decisions, political shifts, and the ongoing efforts of advocates and local leaders. For now, immigrants, families, and communities must stay alert and prepared for a changing landscape.
This Article in a Nutshell
This article is a perfect example of liberal bias in the media. Of course there’s a difference in how ICE operates in red states v blue states – it’s not rocket science. The reason is very simple to understand… states that refuse to cooperate with ICE v. those that do. Red states, and some blue cities are cooperating with ICE by honoring detainers, and working with them to get rid of criminal illegals, and those who received final deportation orders, but refuse to self-deport. With those states that cooperate, ICE simply, quietly, and without a major show of force, goes to the jails, picks up the criminal illegals, and leaves without a fuss. Having to look for, and apprehend violent, illegal criminals in neighborhoods is very dangerous for the officers, and the public, therefore they need an entire team of officers. If cities cooperated there’d be no need to go into communities to find them, hence no chance of encountering other illegals who are here illegally, but have committed no other crimes. If an immigration enforcement officer comes into contact with other illegals while conducting operations, they’re not going to just ignore that they are here in violation of US law. They’re going to uphold the laws, and take them into custody. Why is this such a hard concept for liberals to understand? If these sanctuary cities just worked with ICE, there would be no need for massive ICE operations in their cities. Liberal politicians are causing the chaos by refusing to work with them. Their sanctuary policies have the exact opposite affect – it makes their communties less safe. If they don’t want illegals who have committed no additional crimes to be swept up, allow ICE to apprehend criminal illegals in their jails. My guess is these politicians want the protests and chaos because it helps their progressive agenda, and narrative that all LE are bad, and should be abolished. There’s no other reason to refuse to cooperate.
Obviously visaverge believes that people who enter our country illegally are not breaking the law which in itself is wrong and they don’t believe in law and order. If immigrants come into the country legally then they are here legally this is not hard to understand but obviously it is for visaverge
The authors may not even realize their liberal bias in this article. Take this statement as an example:
“In red states, people are more likely to be arrested after serving time for even minor offenses or after being held in local jails for things like traffic violations.”
They want to make it sound like people were just picked up for minor stuff, perhaps even jaywalking. Think about getting arrested for a traffic violation. That doesn’t happen easily. Usually it has to be something pretty egregious to get you arrested!
People with no criminal history are being detained? They already broke the law by illegally entering the country.