What specific cases or names of ICE agents were investigated for white supremacist or extremist affiliations since 2020?

1. The Pahrump/Nevada detention captain case: a named security official tied to Iron March

Reporting by Vice and subsequent local outlets identified a captain at an ICE detention facility in Pahrump whose online activity on the neo‑Nazi forum Iron March led to calls for investigation and oversight from senators and immigration advocates; Vice’s reporting and follow‑ups connected that official—identified in later summaries as “Frey” in reporting about CoreCivic and the Nevada Southern Detention Center—to posts and profiles on extremist sites, which prompted lawmakers to ask DHS inspectors to review the facility’s hiring and oversight practices ^{[1] [2]}.

2. James “Jim” Joseph Rodden: an ICE attorney alleged to operate a white‑supremacist X account

Investigative reporting in 2025 named James “Jim” Joseph Rodden, an ICE assistant chief counsel in Dallas, as the operator of an account called GlomarResponder on X, alleging a pattern of white‑supremacist content tied to biographical matches; members of Congress pressed ICE for a transparent account and ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations and said it would address them through investigation ^[3].

3. Tattoo and symbol allegations during field operations: congressional attention without named agents

Congressional correspondence and press inquiries arising from high‑visibility raids referenced the appearance of extremist symbols—specifically a “valknut” tattoo—on a federal agent involved in a Martha’s Vineyard operation and sought ICE policies on tattoos and extremist imagery, but those public records do not identify the agent by name and amount to allegations prompting oversight questions rather than disclosed personnel investigations in the record provided ^[4].

4. How agencies responded and limits of public reporting

In the Rodden matter ICE publicly acknowledged media reports and said OPR would investigate, and congressional offices continued to seek substantive follow‑up; in the Nevada detention center matter, senators urged DHS probes into employee standards after Vice’s reporting, illustrating that investigations have been driven by media exposure and congressional pressure rather than routine disclosure ^{[3] [1]}. The available sources document these high‑profile examples and oversight requests but do not provide a comprehensive agency list or final disciplinary outcomes for every case since 2020, so certainty about the full scope of internal probes or their resolutions is limited by public reporting ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Alternative perspectives and institutional dynamics

ICE and DHS sometimes emphasize due process for employees and confidentiality of personnel investigations, and public statements have framed inquiries as “appropriate, fairly, and expeditiously” handled by OPR—language ICE used in response to congressional queries about the Rodden reporting—while critics argue that media attention is required to spur accountability and that alleged extremist ties reflect broader cultural problems in immigration enforcement; both positions appear across the cited coverage ^{[3] [1] [2]}.

6. What the records show—and what remains unreported

The documented, named instances in the supplied reporting are the Pahrump/Nevada facility captain tied to Iron March (reported in Vice and summarized by The Hill and Nevada Current) and James Rodden, the Dallas ICE attorney alleged to operate an extremist X account, plus anonymous or unnamed allegations of extremist symbols on agents during raids that prompted congressional questions; beyond these items the sources do not supply a comprehensive list of all ICE agents investigated since 2020, nor do they provide final OPR findings or personnel actions for each allegation, so any wider claim about systemic prevalence cannot be fully supported from the provided material ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.