How has DHS defined and counted 'assaults' on ICE officers in its 2025 reports?

1. What DHS officially announced: headline counts and shifting windows

DHS public statements and ICE releases from mid‑2025 through January 2026 repeatedly touted dramatic percentage spikes—figures presented include 500%, 830%, more than 1,000%, and a 1,347% increase in assaults—based on counts the department published in press statements covering different date ranges (examples: Jan. 21–July 14, Jan. 21–Nov. 21, Jan. 20–Dec. 31) and specific totals such as “238” or “275” reported assaults in 2025 compared with “19” or other small baselines in 2024 ^{[3] [6] [2] [1] [7]}.

2. How DHS appears to define the category ‘assaults’ in practice

Beyond citing physical hits, throws, and vehicular attacks, DHS officials and Secretary Kristi Noem publicly described “violence” to include threats, doxing, and videotaping of agents—language indicating the department counts non‑contact hostile acts and harassment as part of its assault/violence tally ^{[8] [5]}. DHS press materials also referenced vehicular assaults, death threats, and harassment campaigns as inputs to their counts ^{[1] [6]}.

3. Concrete incidents cited by DHS as examples

DHS releases and ICE statements point to a mixture of injuries and alleged violent confrontations—examples include officers reportedly dragged by vehicles, officers receiving cuts and concussions during arrests, and prosecuted cases of forcible assault on federal officers—used to justify the broader statistics ^{[3] [2] [9]}. At the same time, DHS also cited episodes of doxing and targeted harassment as part of the narrative of rising attacks ^{[6] [1]}.

4. Independent reporting and fact checks: expanded definitions and small baselines

Investigations and commentary by outlets such as Mother Jones, The Prospect, The Guardian and local reporters noted DHS shared small raw counts with journalists (e.g., data showing assaults rising from single‑digits to a few dozen in some slices) and repeatedly changed the percentage framing, which made increases appear much larger than raw‑number context warranted ^{[4] [5] [8]}. Critics argue DHS’s inclusion of non‑physical acts like videotaping or trash on a lawn in the “violence/assault” framing stretches ordinary definitions of assault ^{[5] [8]}.

5. Data gaps, courtroom records, and caution from local reporting

Analysts and local reporters caution that national criminal filings do not show remotely comparable surges in formal assault charges against federal officers; federal court databases recorded a modest rise (about 25% through mid‑September 2025) in charges of assault on federal officers, suggesting DHS’s reported percent increases rely on internal incident tallies rather than parallel increases in prosecutions ^[10]. Independent outlets also flagged inconsistent timeframes and shifting denominators across DHS releases, complicating direct year‑to‑year comparisons ^{[10] [4]}.

6. Takeaway: definition, counting method, and the political frame

DHS’s 2025 public reporting counts a mix of physical assaults, vehicular attacks, threats and harassment, and has—according to journalists and critics—expanded the operational definition of “assault” to include non‑physical hostile acts like doxing and videotaping; DHS packaged those counts across varying windows to highlight large percentage increases, while independent data and court records suggest the raw numbers behind those percentages are much smaller and the methodology is not fully transparent in public releases ^{[1] [5] [4] [10]}. Sources present two clear vantage points: DHS emphasizes officer safety and rising threats ^{[1] [6]}, while journalists and civil liberties advocates contend the agency’s framing obscures small raw counts and risks criminalizing protest and journalistic activity ^{[5] [8]}.