Fact check: What are the criteria for detaining illegal immigrants who commit crimes?

1. Summary of the results

The criteria for detaining illegal immigrants who commit crimes involves multiple layers of policy and enforcement priorities. ICE officially focuses on arresting noncitizens who have committed crimes, particularly those who pose threats to national security, public safety, or border security ^[1]. The agency has conducted operations targeting individuals with serious criminal charges including murder, homicide, and assault against children ^[1], as well as rapists, kidnappers, and gang members in sanctuary cities ^[2].

However, the actual implementation shows significant deviation from crime-focused criteria. Analysis reveals that detentions of immigrants without criminal histories have risen sharply, and the majority of those with criminal convictions were not for violent offenses ^[3]. In fact, only about 8% of detained immigrants have violent convictions ^[3].

The Trump administration dramatically expanded detention criteria beyond criminal activity by reinterpreting immigration law from the 1990s. This policy change makes millions of immigrants who entered without legal authorization ineligible for bond hearings, requiring them to remain in detention throughout their deportation proceedings regardless of criminal history ^{[4] [5]}. Undocumented migrants are now rendered ineligible for bail hearings and could be detained for months or years as their cases play out ^[6].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question assumes that criminal activity is the primary criterion for detention, but the current system operates on much broader grounds. The policy reinterpretation means that simply entering the U.S. illegally, regardless of subsequent criminal behavior, can now serve as grounds for indefinite detention ^[7].

Immigration attorneys argue this policy change represents a "radical departure" that could explode the detention population ^[6]. The only avenue for release under the new system is if ICE officials agree to "parole" detainees out of custody, giving enforcement agencies significant discretionary power ^[7].

The Department of Homeland Security benefits from this expanded interpretation as it allows for broader enforcement capabilities and removes judicial oversight through bond hearings. ICE expects to face legal challenges to this move, indicating awareness of its controversial nature ^[6].

Sanctuary jurisdictions present an alternative viewpoint, as they prioritize different approaches to immigration enforcement. However, federal agencies emphasize "the importance of prioritizing the safety of American citizens over the protection of criminal illegal aliens" when operating in these areas ^[2].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains an implicit assumption that criminal activity is the primary or sole criterion for detaining illegal immigrants. This framing is misleading because:

• The current system detains immigrants based on immigration status alone, not criminal activity ^{[4] [7]}
• The majority of detained immigrants do not have violent criminal convictions ^[3]
• Detentions of non-criminal immigrants have actually increased sharply ^[3]

The question's framing could lead readers to believe that detention is primarily reserved for dangerous criminals, when the data shows that criminal history is not a prerequisite for detention under current policies. This misrepresentation benefits those who support expanded immigration enforcement by making the policy appear more targeted and reasonable than it actually is in practice.