Can ICE detain legal immigrants or green card holders, and under what circumstances?

1. What advocates, reporters and officials all say — green cards are not absolute shields

Multiple recent cases and summaries converge on the claim that a green card does not guarantee immunity from ICE enforcement: lawful permanent residency can be revoked or challenged when statutory grounds for removal exist. Reporting on individual arrests — including long‑term residents detained over past misdemeanors and teen‑era crimes resurfacing during checks — illustrates how enforcement can be triggered years after the fact ^{[1] [4]}. Legal guides and DHS statements reproduced in advocacy materials emphasize that certain convictions render residents removable or inadmissible, and that ICE may detain individuals during removal proceedings, sometimes even when they have longstanding ties and family in the U.S. ^{[2] [5]}.

2. The statutory mechanics — mandatory vs discretionary detention

U.S. immigration law creates two broad paths to detention: mandatory detention for specific grounds (for example, aggravated felonies or other enumerated offenses) and discretionary detention when ICE determines a person poses a public‑safety or flight risk. Fact sheets and detention‑management descriptions note that mandatory custody can eliminate bond options, while discretionary custody involves case‑by‑case determinations that can permit bond or release under supervision ^{[3] [6]}. Recent sources reiterate that ICE’s priorities and internal designations influence which lawful residents face detention, and that statutory categories, not immigration status alone, determine mandatory custody in court practice ^{[6] [7]}.

3. How enforcement plays out in practice — routine checks, travel, and workplace operations

ICE arrests often occur during scheduled check‑ins, at ports of entry, during workplace enforcement, or following information of criminal history. Legal aid and rights‑education outlets document that routine interactions — such as reporting appointments or border inspections — can become arrest points when ICE has an outstanding removal order, revocation, or newly discovered conviction ^{[2] [7]}. Reporting on individual cases underscores how administrative processes — revocation based on old charges, or discovery of convictions during background checks — can convert everyday engagements with immigration authorities into detention episodes ^{[4] [1]}.

4. Detention conditions, length and bond realities — long stays are common

Analyses of detention data and legal summaries consistently find legal noncitizens often face prolonged detention while contesting removal, with some held a year or longer pending hearings. Sources explain that detention can occur in ICE facilities or local jails, release may require posting bond when permitted, and access to counsel is limited to private representation since no public defender is provided in immigration court ^{[8] [2]}. These operational realities mean that even when a lawful resident has legal arguments or relief available, practical barriers and backlog‑driven delays frequently result in protracted custody.

5. Rights at the point of contact and practical steps emphasized by advocates

All sources reiterate constitutional and procedural protections that remain relevant to detained residents: the right to remain silent, limits on ICE entry into homes without judicial warrants, and the ability to seek legal counsel. Rights guides advise carrying proof of status, preparing emergency contacts, and knowing how bond eligibility and detention hearings work; advocates warn that ignorance of these protections increases vulnerability during enforcement encounters ^{[9] [2]}. Reporting also highlights potential agendas: advocacy groups emphasize civil‑liberties risks and demand policy changes, while government summaries frame detention as public‑safety and immigration‑control tools, reflecting differing priorities in how enforcement is presented ^{[7] [6]}.

6. Comparative takeaway — law, discretion, and human consequences

Comparing legal guidance, reporting, and government descriptions shows a consistent legal framework: green card holders can be detained when immigration statutes identify removability or when ICE exercises detention authority, with mandatory custody for specified crimes and broad discretion otherwise ^{[3] [6]}. Recent news cases bring the human overlay — long residence, family ties, and rehabilitative claims often collide with statutory triggers and enforcement choices, producing contentious detentions and lengthy processes. Readers should treat each case on its facts: the statute and enforcement priorities dictate outcomes, but operational delays, enforcement tactics, and access to counsel shape the ultimate human and legal consequences ^{[1] [8]}.