Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Can U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detain U.S. citizens during a protest in 2025?
Executive Summary
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) does not have blanket authority to detain U.S. citizens; constitutional protections generally bar ICE from holding citizens on immigration grounds, yet multiple recent reports and lawsuits show instances where ICE agents have detained or arrested people who were later identified as U.S. citizens, including during protest-related enforcement actions [1] [2] [3]. The legal landscape combines clear statutory limits on ICE’s immigration detention power with evolving court rulings requiring probable cause and neutral review, producing tension between enforcement practices reported in 2025 and constitutional safeguards [4] [5].
1. Shocking tally: Reports document citizens held by immigration agents during enforcement operations
Investigations and news reporting in October 2025 found more than 170 instances where individuals later identified as U.S. citizens were held by immigration agents, and some were detained for more than a day without contact with family or counsel, raising serious due process concerns [1] [2]. These accounts include named lawsuits and local reporting that contradict official statements denying citizen detentions, and they explicitly link some cases to Operation Midway Blitz and protest-related enforcement activities in Chicago; the factual record shows ICE actions resulted in citizen detentions that prompted litigation and media scrutiny [2] [3]. The reporting’s publication dates in October 2025 situate these revelations firmly within the current enforcement cycle [1] [3].
2. What the law allows — and forbids — ICE to do at protests
Statutes and ICE regulations vest the agency with authority to arrest and detain noncitizens for immigration purposes, but constitutional protections — particularly the Fourth and Fifth Amendments — prohibit detention of citizens without probable cause and due process; ICE’s determinant power is therefore confined to noncitizens and to criminal matters where proper authority exists [4] [6]. Legal commentary and agency analyses from April 2025 emphasize that ICE actions must still satisfy constitutional thresholds and that arresting a person as an immigration enforcement action when that person is a citizen is not a lawful exercise of immigration detention powers [4] [6]. The law therefore draws a bright line in principle even as enforcement practice can blur it.
3. Courts inserting checks: recent rulings demanding neutral review and probable cause
Federal appellate decisions in 2025 reinforced that the Fourth Amendment requires neutral decisionmakers and probable cause before prolonged detention premised on ICE detainers, and those rulings explicitly protect individuals — including citizens who are mistakenly detained — from being held without judicial scrutiny [5]. These rulings have directed that detentions tied to ICE detainers be promptly reviewed and that procedural safeguards must apply regardless of immigration status claims, weakening administrative practices that led to prolonged holds and prompting legal challenges when safeguards were not provided [5]. The judicial trend supplies a legal basis for plaintiffs’ success in recent cases and frames how lower courts and jurisdictions must respond to citizen-detainment claims.
4. Conflicting narratives: agency denials, media evidence, and ongoing litigation
Public statements from some officials asserting that no citizens were detained during a set of immigration operations stand in stark contrast to investigative reporting and pending lawsuits documenting citizen detentions [3] [2]. The discrepancy has produced competing narratives: government statements defending enforcement fidelity versus journalists and plaintiffs presenting case files, witness testimony, and legal filings showing otherwise [1] [2]. This divergence suggests possible gaps in internal identification processes, errors in field screening, or differing definitions of “detained” versus “processed,” and it flags institutional incentives to minimize political fallout while litigants and advocacy groups emphasize factual discrepancies in public records [3] [1].
5. Bottom line and what to watch next — accountability, policy fixes, and protest policing
The factual bottom line is that ICE lacks lawful authority to detain U.S. citizens as immigration enforcement, but credible reporting and court filings from 2025 prove that citizens have been detained by immigration agents, prompting constitutional challenges and appellate rulings that require neutral judicial review and probable cause [1] [5]. Watch for outcomes of ongoing lawsuits and administrative investigations that could force agency policy changes, mandate stronger training on citizenship screening, and require rapid access to counsel for anyone held; these remedies are the primary mechanisms to reconcile enforcement practice with constitutional guarantees during protests and crowd-control operations [2] [5].