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.
What are the most common crimes that lead to ICE deportation of undocumented immigrants?
Executive Summary
The most commonly reported offenses that lead to ICE enforcement actions are driving under the influence (DUI), drug possession, assault, theft, and criminal traffic offenses such as hit-and-run or leaving the scene; federal ICE/ERO statistics and multiple analyses list these offenses repeatedly as frequent causes for interior arrests and removals [1] [2] [3]. At the same time, independent reporting and analyses show a substantial and growing share of people in ICE custody have no criminal conviction or were held for minor infractions such as traffic violations or immigration-only grounds, producing conflicting impressions about ICE priorities and definitions of “criminal” [4] [5] [6]. The data stream is fragmented between agency tallies and investigative reports, so both the pattern of common criminal convictions and the large number of non‑criminal detentions are empirically documented and worth reconciling [7] [5].
1. The definition fight: How enforcement labels shape the picture
ICE enforcement statistics and independent analyses show that the classification of who is a “criminal” in immigration contexts is not uniform. ICE reports often highlight that a high share of arrests and removals involve people with criminal convictions or pending charges, framing enforcement as targeted at criminal offenders [7] [6]. Journalistic and research analyses, however, document that many people in ICE custody or removed from the interior either have no criminal conviction or were detained for civil or minor offenses like traffic violations or immigration violations, which are treated as deportable rather than criminal under immigration law [4] [5]. This divergence matters because policy narratives about removing “dangerous criminals” can obscure that enforcement also reaches people whose interactions with the criminal justice system are limited or non‑criminal in nature [4].
2. The recurring offenders: Which crimes show up most in ICE data
Multiple sources reviewing ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations and reporting on interior removals identify a consistent cluster of offenses that frequently appear in agency tallies: DUI, drug possession, assault, theft, and criminal traffic violations including hit‑and‑run and leaving the scene [1] [2] [3]. Agency summaries and migration policy explainer pieces list these categories as common underpinnings of interior arrests and removals, reflecting both state criminal convictions and charges that make someone a priority for removal under enforcement guidance [2] [1]. These categories cover a wide range of severity, from nonviolent misdemeanors to violent felonies, and ICE reporting aggregates them into the broader claim that a majority of interior removals involve people with criminal histories [7].
3. The competing statistic: Large numbers with no criminal convictions
Investigations and reporting have found that a sizeable and sometimes majority share of people in ICE detention and some removal cohorts lack criminal convictions, challenging the “criminal‑focused” enforcement narrative. One analysis documented that immigrants with no criminal record became the largest group in detention at a recent point, and other reporting found that two‑thirds of more than 120,000 people deported in a recent multi‑month period had no criminal conviction [4] [5]. ICE’s own historical data show a high share of arrestees with convictions or pending charges in some years, producing an apparent tension between the agency’s aggregate claims and investigative snapshots that highlight non‑criminal detentions [7] [6].
4. Two narratives, two agendas: Enforcement emphasis versus civil‑society scrutiny
Government releases and advocates for stricter enforcement emphasize the share of arrests and removals tied to criminal convictions to justify interior enforcement priorities, stressing public safety and recidivism metrics [7] [6]. Conversely, investigative journalists, immigrant‑rights groups, and some policy researchers emphasize the number of people detained or removed for minor offenses, traffic violations, or immigration‑only grounds to argue that ICE’s reach is broader and that enforcement can break families and communities [5] [4]. Both frames use overlapping data but select different aggregates; the agency’s focus on conviction‑shares and the critics’ focus on non‑convicted detainees both reflect valid slices of the same fragmented data landscape [6] [5].
5. What the data doesn’t settle and what to watch next
The available analyses document clear patterns—certain criminal convictions commonly appear in ICE interior enforcement, and a nontrivial share of detainees lack criminal convictions—but they also reveal data gaps. Publicly reported ICE statistics aggregate by conviction status and broad offense categories, while journalistic datasets often sample specific months or detainee cohorts, creating mismatches when making broad claims [1] [5]. Watch for improved transparency in ICE/ERO reporting on interior removals, clearer breakdowns by offense severity and conviction versus pending charge status, and independent audits comparing agency counts to court and local law‑enforcement records; that reporting will better reconcile the tension between the counts of convicted offenders and the documented prevalence of minor‑offense and non‑convicted detainees [7] [4].