What crimes qualify someone for ICE detention or expedited removal under current immigration law?
Executive summary
ICE detains people to secure appearance for immigration proceedings and to remove those “subject to mandatory detention” under U.S. law; ICE reported it manages tens of thousands in custody and provides public statistics describing detention and Alternatives to Detention [1]. Separately, “expedited removal” is a statutory fast‑track deportation tool that DHS has been using more broadly since January 2025 to remove noncitizens deemed inadmissible for fraud/misrepresentation or who lack valid entry documents, and Congress and the administration have proposed and debated further fast‑track removal for people convicted of certain crimes [2] [3] [4].
1. What ICE detention authority covers — custody to secure appearance and mandatory detention
ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) detains individuals “as necessary, including to secure their presence for immigration proceedings and removal,” and also detains those who are “subject to mandatory detention under U.S.” law, according to ICE’s public materials [1]. ICE publishes arrest, removal and detention statistics and oversees detention standards that apply differently depending on facility type (PBNDS vs. NDS) [1] [5].
2. Which criminal convictions commonly produce mandatory detention or deportability under the INA
Available sources show Congress and DHS focus on particular criminal categories for removal: bills and statutes target aggravated felonies, felonies, sexual offenses, domestic violence, stalking, crimes against children, assaults on law enforcement, and misdemeanors against vulnerable groups as grounds for expedited removal or prioritized removal of criminal aliens [6] [4]. Legislative texts explicitly propose expedited removal for aliens who “have been convicted of any felony, any misdemeanor against a member of a vulnerable group, any assault of a law enforcement officer, any sexual offense, any crime of domestic violence, any stalking offense, any crime against children…” [4].
3. What “expedited removal” covers now — fraud, lack of documents, and expanded classes
Expedited removal was enacted in the 1990s to allow summary removal of noncitizens found inadmissible for fraud or improper documentation. DHS authorities have expanded its practical scope at times; since January 2025 DHS announced applying expedited removal “to the fullest extent authorized by Congress” and designated classes of aliens who lack valid entry documents or sought admission through fraud or misrepresentation as subject to expedited removal [7] [3]. Advocacy organizations and legal trackers describe this expansion as re‑applying earlier broader designations and note that the process can be used against people encountered in the interior who have been in the U.S. under two years [7] [8].
4. Who decides removability in expedited removal — officers, not judges
Expedited removal places low‑level immigration officers in the decisive role to order deportation without the usual immigration judge hearing; critics say this curtails judicial process and increases risk of error [2] [7]. Federal litigation has challenged the administration’s 2025 expansion as risking “erroneous summary removal” and raising due‑process concerns [9] [10].
5. How criminal history interacts with expedited removal versus other authorities
Statutory expedited removal under some provisions (e.g., 8 U.S.C. §1228 and related authorities) specifically addresses aliens convicted of aggravated felonies or certain serious crimes, enabling expedited processes tied to criminal convictions and post‑incarceration removal [6]. Separate DHS expansions focus on inadmissibility (fraud, lack of documents) rather than conviction history; meanwhile Congress has proposed bills to expand expedited removal to people convicted of specified crimes such as gang membership, terrorism support, and the listed violent/sexual offenses [4] [11].
6. Practical limits, agency capacity, and political pressures
ICE itself warns that statutory detention mandates would strain bed capacity — ICE told Congress in 2025 it had funding for roughly 42,000 beds and said new detention requirements would require billions more [12]. Policy choices — DHS designations, executive orders, and pending legislation — determine whether detention or expedited removal is used, meaning enforcement practice can swing with administrations and statutes [13] [1].
7. Conflicting perspectives and legal challenges
DHS and ICE present expanded expedited removal and increased detention as tools to speed removal of those who are inadmissible or criminally convicted [13] [4]. Civil‑rights groups, immigration advocates, and some courts warn the expansions reduce due process and risk wrongful deportations; litigation challenging the 2025 expansions cites the Fifth Amendment and INA grounds [10] [9].
Limitations: Sources provided do not list an exhaustive statute‑by‑statute catalog tying every criminal offense to mandatory ICE detention; detailed statutory crosswalks or enforcement guidance beyond the cited legislative texts and policy notices are not in the current reporting (not found in current reporting).