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.
Fact check: How many people being deported by ICE are criminals?
Executive Summary
The claim “How many people being deported by ICE are criminals?” cannot be answered with a single percentage from the material provided because recent ICE reports and news analyses show a mixed picture: ICE highlights removal of convicted offenders, while independent reporting and agency data from late 2024–2025 show a growing share of detainees with no criminal record. Available summaries indicate that, as of September–October 2025 reporting, non-criminals compose either the largest single group in detention or a very large share of recent arrests, even as ICE continues to publicize high-profile removals of serious offenders [1] [2] [3].
1. What advocates and watchdogs are pointing at — a surprising majority without convictions
Independent reporting in late September 2025 documents that people with no criminal record became the largest group in ICE detention, with counts cited as 16,523 arrested with no record versus 15,725 with criminal records and 13,767 with pending charges, framing a shift away from a sole focus on “criminal aliens” [1]. These pieces characterize a trend through September 2025 in which the portion of arrests of people without convictions rose substantially, with journalists concluding that nearly a third of ICE arrests had no criminal history, a figure used to argue that enforcement expanded beyond convicted criminals [2].
2. What ICE emphasizes — removals of convicted offenders and public‑safety framing
ICE’s own communications and reporting focus on removals of individuals with serious convictions and organized‑crime links, including specific operations and deportation flights that included convicted murderers and human smugglers, and arrests of previously deported gang members, illustrating the agency’s emphasis on public‑safety removals [3] [4]. ICE reports and press releases typically highlight these removals to justify enforcement priorities; however, those releases do not provide an overall percentage breakdown that would reconcile the agency’s public‑safety narrative with independent counts of non‑criminal detainees [5] [4].
3. Case examples complicate the headline numbers — victims, pending charges, and policy changes
Journalistic accounts from September 2025 describe individuals who are crime victims or have pending charges being detained under new or amended ICE policies, including a named case where a felony‑assault victim was nevertheless detained after protections were rescinded, underscoring how policy shifts affect who is removable beyond convictions [6]. These accounts underscore that the binary “criminal vs. non‑criminal” framing omits important categories: victims, people with pending charges, and those previously convicted but now subject to removal on statutory grounds.
4. Conflicting counts arise from differing definitions and datasets
The divergence between ICE’s enforcement messaging and independent tallies reflects different definitions (convicted offender vs. pending charge vs. no record) and varying time frames and datasets; ICE’s annual report and operation briefs rarely present the same snapshot used by reporters analyzing detention booking records, producing apparently contradictory narratives [5] [1]. Analysts note that detention bookings, enforcement arrests, and final removals are distinct stages; a person without a conviction can be arrested and then later removed, or vice versa, which complicates any single “percentage criminal” claim [2].
5. What the available data does not tell us — crucial gaps and limits
Neither ICE press material nor the cited reporting provides a clean, single metric like “X% of deported people were convicted criminals in FY 2024–25,” leaving an evidentiary gap: no source here supplies an authoritative, up‑to‑date percentage of deportees who had criminal convictions at removal [5] [4]. The absence of a consistent public dataset that aligns definitions and time windows prevents definitive percentage claims based on the provided sources, and published articles note this transparency gap while drawing different conclusions depending on chosen measures [1] [2].
6. Why the difference matters — policy, public safety, and reporting incentives
The competing emphases reflect institutional incentives: ICE and some officials spotlight removals of dangerous offenders to justify enforcement, while reporters and advocates use detention booking and arrest counts to show broad enforcement affecting non‑criminals and victims, highlighting how the same enforcement actions can be framed as public‑safety priorities or as overreach depending on choice of metric [3] [6]. Both framings are factually supported by different subsets of data from late 2024–September 2025, so policy debates hinge on which measures policymakers and the public accept.
7. Bottom line — nuanced answer, not a single number
The correct, evidence‑based answer is that no single percentage emerges from the provided sources: ICE documents and press releases show significant removals of convicted offenders, while contemporaneous reporting shows a substantial and rising share of arrests and detentions involve people with no criminal record or with pending charges [5] [1] [2] [3]. To produce a definitive percentage would require consolidated ICE datasets that explicitly define “criminal,” distinguish convicted from charged, and report removals over a consistent period — data not supplied in the materials reviewed here [5] [4].