SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
american immigration council
New DHS Database Suggests That Less Than 5% of Those Arrested by ICE Are the ‘Worst of the Worst’
The database contains just 9,738 total people, a tiny fraction of the more than 220,000 ICE data says the agency arrested between January 21 and October 15.
Dec 10, 2025
In response to criticism of its aggressive and often lawless "mass deportation" campaign—which has entailed sweeping raids by masked agents, the use of squalid detention centers rife with torture, overt racial profiling, and the near-total abrogation of due process—the Trump administration has often fallen back on a familiar refrain: that the immigrants it targets are "the worst of the worst" dangerous criminals.
Immigration data published throughout the second Trump administration has already undermined this claim. Last month, David J. Bier of the Cato Institute published new data showing that between October 1 and November 15, only 5% of those booked into ICE detention had violent criminal convictions, while 73% had no convictions at all. It mirrored previous data published by Cato in June, which showed that 65% arrested had no criminal convictions of any kind, while 93% had no violent convictions.
Justice Department data published last month, meanwhile, showed that of the at least 614 people snatched up in the Operation Midway Blitz crackdown in Chicago, just 16 had criminal records of any kind.
On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security published its own "Worst of the Worst" database seeking to reverse the narrative, but it seems to have done the opposite.
"DHS has launched WOW.DHS.GOV for Americans to see the criminal illegal aliens that we are arresting, what crimes they committed, and what communities we removed them from," read a post from the agency on social media.
The post leads to a website containing the names, photos, and nationalities of those arrested by ICE. It also lists alleged past criminal convictions. In many cases, the only documentation of the allegations, if any is provided at all, is a DHS press release rather than official court records.
"Under Secretary [Kristi] Noem's leadership, the hardworking men and women of DHS and ICE are fulfilling President Trump's promise and carrying out mass deportations—starting with the worst of the worst—including the illegal aliens you see here," a header on the website reads.
Among those listed are people who DHS says have been convicted of heinous crimes, ranging from attempted murder to child abduction to domestic battery.
But the database contains just 9,738 total people, a tiny fraction of the more than 220,000 ICE data says the agency arrested between January 21 and October 15.
"So DHS is implicitly admitting that less than 5% of the people it arrests are people they believe are 'the worst of the worst,'" said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.
Moreover, even some of those listed among the "Worst of the Worst" have only nonviolent offenses to their name, like drug possession, shoplifting, or disorderly conduct.
Reichlin-Melnick also noted that while immigration law does not require a criminal conviction for a person to be removed, "it matters because the administration talks as if these cases are the majority."
"There are definitely bad people on there who deserve deportation, but plenty of others on the list have nothing worse than a misdemeanor," he said. “If the administration were to actually focus its resources on people who were serious public safety threats or fugitives, there would be less of an outcry. But data shows that the big focus has been on boosting numbers by going after people no previous administration, Republican or Democrat, prioritized.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Reagan-Appointed Judge Rips Into Trump Admin for Illegally Targeting Pro-Palestine Student Protesters
Politico's senior law reporter called it "the most scathing legal rebuke of the Trump era."
Sep 30, 2025
A federal judge issued an emphatic ruling Tuesday that the Trump administration acted illegally when it targeted pro-Palestinian student activists for deportation, describing it as part of an effort to "strike fear" into protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.
In the 161-page ruling, US District Judge William Young, who was appointed by former President Ronald Reagan, concluded that the Trump administration undertook illegal efforts "unconstitutionally to chill freedom of speech."
He also launched a broadside against the Trump administration's entire authoritarian ethos, describing President Donald Trump's "palpable misunderstanding that the government simply cannot seek retribution for speech he disdains."
Politico's senior law reporter Kyle Cheney described the ruling as "the most scathing legal rebuke of the Trump era." Young himself called it the most important he's ever issued in over 30 years on the bench.
The first page immediately captures this gravity, containing a scan of an anonymous postcard Young received in June as a prologue: "Trump has pardons and tanks... what do you have?" the sender asked.
Young included his response: "Alone, I have nothing but my sense of duty. Together, We the People ... have our magnificent Constitution. Here's how that works out in a specific case."
The case was launched following a lawsuit from the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association, which represent hundreds of college professors around the US who testified that they felt intimidated by what they described as "ideological deportations" by the Trump administration of students who expressed pro-Palestinian views.
Often without warning, the State Department revoked nearly 1,700 visas from lawful immigrants before targeting many of them for deportation under an executive order by Trump that allegedly responds to "antisemitism," but in practice extends far out to encompass any expressions of solidarity with Palestinians or criticisms of Israel.
During the trial, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) acknowledged that it determined who to target using an anonymously operated pro-Israel "doxxing" website known as the Canary Mission, which publishes dossiers on college students around the country who express unfavorable views about Israel.
One of those students was Mahmoud Khalil, an activist at Columbia who held a green card, who was whisked away from his address in the middle of the night by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and sent to a detention facility for months. As Young acknowledged in his ruling, Troy Edgar, the deputy secretary of homeland security, stated plainly in an interview that the effort to deport Khalil was because of "basically pro-Palestinian activity." After a federal judge ordered Khalil's release, the Trump administration began efforts to deport him to Algeria or Syria.
ICE agents also snatched Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish PhD student at Tufts, off the street in broad daylight after she co-wrote an op-ed calling for her university to divest from companies participating in Israel's genocidal war in Gaza. Although the administration acknowledged that Öztürk, who had a legal student visa, committed no crime, she remained in an ICE detention facility for more than six weeks before a judge ordered her release.
Young said that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other officials, such as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who oversees ICE, "acted in concert to misuse the sweeping powers of their respective offices to target noncitizen pro-Palestinians for deportation primarily on account of their First Amendment-protected political speech."
He refuted the professors' contention that the administration had waged an "ideological deportation policy," which he said "could have raised a major outcry." Instead, Young said, their intentions were "more invidious—to target a few for speaking out and then use the full rigor of the Immigration and Nationality Act (in ways it had never been used before) to have them publicly deported with the goal of tamping down pro-Palestinian student protests and terrorizing similarly situated noncitizen (and other) pro-Palestinians into silence because their views were unwelcome."
To strip visas "solely on the basis of political speech, and with the intent of chilling such speech," Young said, "is not only unconstitutional, but a thing virtually unknown to our constitutional tradition." The First Amendment of that Constitution, he added, "does not distinguish between citizens and noncitizens."
Young did not order any changes to Trump administration policy with his ruling, but only because Trump "poses a great threat to Americans’ freedom of speech" as a whole, and further proceedings would be necessary in order to rein in those abuses more comprehensively.
He specifically identified the use of masks by ICE agents during arrests, which he described as "disingenuous, squalid and dishonorable."
"ICE goes masked for a single reason: to terrorize Americans into quiescence," Young said. "In all our history, we have never tolerated an armed, masked secret police."
The final 12 pages of the ruling, which American Immigration Council fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick described as "truly remarkable," focus on "the nature of our president himself," who Young said "simply ignores" rulings he dislikes.
Young concluded that the courts, which he described as one of the few remaining bulwarks to Trump's excesses, needed to do more than issue nonbinding cease-and-desist orders, but instead issue permanent injunctions that can result in contempt charges if the administration refuses to stop illegal policies.
Trump, he said, is not "entirely lawless," but "has learned that—at least on the civil side of our courts—neither our Constitution nor our laws enforce themselves and he can do most anything until an aggrieved person or entity will stand up to him and say 'Nay.'"
Young also put the responsibility of resistance on the institutions that have capitulated to Trump's demands.
"Our bastions of independent, unbiased free speech–those entities we once thought unassailable—have proven all too often to have only Quaker guns," he warned. "Behold, President Trump’s successes in limiting free speech—law firms cower, institutional leaders in higher education meekly appease the president, media outlets from huge conglomerates to small niche magazines mind the bottom line rather than the ethics of journalism."
"I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected," he wrote in conclusion. "Is he correct?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Legal Fight Underway as Trump Invokes Alien Enemies Act of 1798 for Deportations
"Today was a horrific day in the history of the nation," said the leader of one legal group, but "the rule of law prevailed."
Mar 15, 2025
Even before U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday publicly revealed that he was invoking the Alien Enemies Act, legal groups took action, which led to a federal judge temporarily blocking the administration from using the 1798 law for deportations.
Chief Judge James Boasberg of the District Court for the District of Columbia issued "a classwide, nationwide temporary restraining order, blocking removal of any noncitizens in U.S. custody who are subject to today's AEA order for the next 14 days," according to Law Dork's Chris Geidner. Earlier in the day, the judge had issued a TRO for the individual plaintiffs in this case.
Like Geidner, American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick shared updates from the evening hearing on social media. He noted that the ACLU said at least two planes were en route to El Salvador and Honduras. The judge—an appointee of former President Barack Obama—ordered any planes in the air to turn around but said he could not take action for any aircraft that had landed.
With a few final matters, the hearing is now over. Great job by the ACLU and partners in getting this lawsuit filed so quickly, and on Judge Boasberg for understanding the urgency. We'll have to watch to see whether the planes are turned around in time, as at least one is in the air now.
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) March 15, 2025 at 6:54 PM
The national and D.C. arms of the ACLU launched the lawsuit with Democracy Forward, whose president and CEO, Skye Perryman, stressed early Saturday that "the United States is not at war, nor has it been invaded. The president's anticipated invocation of wartime authority—which is not needed to conduct lawful immigration enforcement operations—is the latest step in an accelerating authoritarian playbook."
"From improperly apprehending American citizens, to violating the ability of communities to peacefully worship, to now improperly trying to invoke a law that is responsible for some of our nation's most shameful actions, this administration's immigration agenda is as lawless as it is harmful," Perryman added. The AEA was most recently used during World War II to force thousands of people of mostly German, Italian, and Japanese descent into internment camps.
Lee Gelernt, lead counsel and deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, called Trump's move "as unprecedented as it is lawless," and said that "it may be the administration's most extreme measure yet, and that is saying a lot."
After the initial TRO, Perryman said that "yet again, the judicial system is essential to protect our democracy. We collaborated through the night with our co-counsel to ensure that the president could not invoke wartime powers to deal with his policy challenges. We are gratified to see the judge's decision and will work on the next stages to ensure those impacted by this dangerous move to invoke wartime powers when the nation is not at war—and has not been invaded—are protected."
After the president’s unlawful and unprecedented invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, a judge issued a nationwide temporary restraining order in Democracy Forward's case with our partners at @aclu.org & @aclu-dc.bsky.social. Full statement to follow.
[image or embed]
— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) March 15, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Following Boasberg's final decision Saturday, the broader TRO, Perryman declared that "today was a horrific day in the history of the nation," but "the rule of law prevailed."
The legal battle stems from an effort to deport five Venezuelans accused of being involved with the gang Tren de Aragua (TdA), but based on Trump's comments on the campaign trail—and his recent designation of multiple cartels as terrorist groups—the president is expected to seek a wider use of the AEA to deliver on his promised mass deportations.
Trump's proclamation, dated Friday but released Saturday, says TdA "is a designated foreign terrorist organization with thousands of members, many of whom have unlawfully infiltrated the United States and are conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States. TdA operates in conjunction with Cártel de los Soles, the Nicolas Maduro regime-sponsored, narco-terrorism enterprise based in Venezuela, and commits brutal crimes, including murders, kidnappings, extortions, and human, drug, and weapons trafficking."
"TdA has engaged in and continues to engage in mass illegal migration to the United States to further its objectives of harming United States citizens, undermining public safety, and supporting the Maduro regime's goal of destabilizing democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States," Trump said. "I proclaim that all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of TdA, are within the United States, and are not actually naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States are liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies."
It is noteworthy that Trump's EO invoking the Alien Enemy Act to deport certain Venezuelans without recourse to the protections of immigration law was signed on March 14, but not made public until today (March 15). In other words, they started the organizing these deportations by secret order.
[image or embed]
— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor.bsky.social) March 15, 2025 at 6:51 PM
The legal fight is far from over. The next hearing before Boasberg is scheduled for Friday afternoon. The groups behind the lawsuit were not alone in sounding the alarm about Trump's invocation of the 18th-century law.
FWD.us president Todd Schulte said in a statement that "the Alien Enemies Act was last used to incarcerate 120,000 Japanese-Americans and tens of thousands of others during World War II. Its use was a mistake and a tragedy."
"There should be no effort to invoke this law today or in the future—against anyone, no matter their immigration status, be they an adult or child, as is proposed in today's declaration," he asserted. "Actions like this have no place in the immigration system or country we should seek to build."
Allison McManus, managing director for national security and foreign policy at the Center for American Progress, said that "invoking the Alien Enemies Act is a dangerous abuse of power intended to deprive people of their legal rights. This announcement comes just one day after the president threatened to use the Department of Justice against his critics, raising the likelihood that these powers will be exploited and put the safety of any American who speaks out against this administration at risk."
McManus added that "every American, regardless of their politics, should be concerned that the president is granting himself powers last invoked to detain thousands of Japanese Americans in internment camps during World War II—one of the most shameful times in U.S. history."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular