What are the most common reasons for wrongful detention by ICE?

1. How errors in ICE databases and decision-making send people to detention rooms

ICE wrongful detentions frequently begin with incorrect or outdated records and administrative errors that create a false basis for arrest. A Ninth Circuit ruling and related litigation show that ICE has relied on error-ridden information to detain people without the necessary probable cause or neutral review, prompting the court to require prompt neutral determinations about detentions, typically within 48 hours ^[1]. Individual cases reported in 2024–2025 illustrate that such database mistakes can cause US citizens and lawful residents to be held for extended periods; plaintiffs’ complaints emphasize that low-level officers or automated flags sometimes trigger arrests without verification. The pattern in the record points to systemic vulnerabilities where faulty data and insufficient internal checks, combined with expansive enforcement discretion, lead directly to wrongful detention and sometimes deportation before errors are caught ^{[4] [1]}.

2. Warrantless arrests, courthouse detentions and the erosion of procedural safeguards

A recurring cause of wrongful detention is the use of warrantless arrests and courthouse arrests, where ICE agents detain people at immigration or other court hearings or stop them without obtaining judicially reviewed warrants. Lawsuits filed in 2025 allege that ICE arrested people after they appeared for hearings or in public without probable cause, sometimes explicitly contravening statutory requirements and judicial authority; plaintiffs say these practices stripped people of due process and led to deportations of those who feared persecution ^{[2] [5]}. Congressional press releases and civil-rights litigation also document operations where agents conducted neighborhood sweeps and arrests that targeted documented individuals and a U.S. citizen veteran, raising questions about whether agents followed legal thresholds for detention and whether arrests were driven by quotas or profiling rather than individualized probable cause ^{[6] [5]}.

3. Profiling, retaliation and the politics of selective enforcement

Multiple cases and complaints allege that racial, national-origin profiling and retaliatory targeting for speech or advocacy contribute to wrongful detentions. Congressional inquiries and lawsuits from 2024–2025 describe ICE actions in communities with specific ethnic concentrations and claims that agents focused on people based on accent, skin color, or perceived nationality, while high-profile plaintiffs allege retaliatory arrests tied to political advocacy, including Palestinian-rights activism ^{[6] [7]}. These allegations are supported by plaintiff testimony and organizational involvement from civil liberties groups, which argue that selective enforcement magnifies errors into wrongful detention when agents prioritize enforcement outcomes or political goals over individualized suspicion and adherence to arrest standards. The pattern suggests a mix of bias, operational practices, and weak oversight that together produce wrongful arrests beyond simple clerical mistakes ^{[7] [6]}.

4. Lack of counsel, secrecy, and medical neglect that let mistakes fester

Wrongful detention is compounded by low rates of legal representation, secrecy around arrest records, and medical or custodial mismanagement that prevent timely correction of errors. Reports show only about 30% of immigrants in deportation proceedings have attorneys, creating a structural disadvantage that leaves mistakes unchallenged; plaintiffs often cite limited access to documents, language barriers, and sealed arrest records that obstruct family inquiries and oversight ^[4]. Separately, medical-mismanagement studies document inadequate care and oversight in detention facilities that endangers medically vulnerable detainees and obscures conditions that might otherwise trigger earlier scrutiny or release. The convergence of poor access to counsel, opaque records practices, and substandard detention conditions multiplies the human cost of wrongful detention and delays remedial processes ^{[4] [8] [3]}.

5. Courts, lawmakers and advocacy groups point to remedies—and show competing interpretations

Federal courts, members of Congress, and civil-rights organizations converge on the need for neutral review, transparency, and procedural safeguards, but they differ on causes and remedies. The Ninth Circuit required neutral decisionmakers and quicker probable-cause review after finding ICE detained people without constitutional protections, framing the issue as legal error and systemic overreach ^[1]. Lawmakers and plaintiffs’ suits frame wrongful detentions as also rooted in discriminatory practices and policy directives that encourage arrests at courthouses or without warrants, calling for investigations and operational reforms ^{[6] [2]}. Academic and NGO analyses emphasize structural causes—reliance on unreliable evidence, tunnel vision, inadequate defense access and medical negligence—pointing toward comprehensive reforms including counsel access, database audits, and independent oversight to prevent future wrongful detentions ^{[3] [8]}. The documentary record from 2020–2025 therefore presents a multi-causal picture: administrative error, procedural shortcuts, bias and systemic resource gaps jointly explain most wrongful detentions.