What independent FOIA-based resources can journalists use to verify ICE removal and arrest counts beyond DHS press releases?
Executive summary
Independent, FOIA-based verification of ICE removals and arrests is possible using agency FOIA portals and public releases, intermediary project datasets that post original individual-level records obtained by FOIA, and civil‑society FOIA archives and guides — but each source carries known gaps, delays, or reliability caveats that reporters must account for [1][2][3].
1. ICE’s FOIA office and public libraries: the primary official source
ICE publishes a FOIA office page and a public FOIA library where reporters can request and sometimes download records about apprehensions, detentions, detainers and removals; the FOIA office is the statutory gateway for records about ICE operations [4][5][1].
2. ICE FOIA logs and category pages: check request histories and released records
ICE maintains FOIA logs and category pages that document what records have been requested and released, letting reporters trace prior disclosures and avoid duplicative requests while identifying which datasets ICE has previously turned over under FOIA [6][5].
3. USCIS FOIA API and TORCH: programmatic access to immigration files
USCIS offers a FOIA API (TORCH) intended for case‑management vendors that can streamline access to immigration case files and system records; reporters with developer resources or partners can use API access to automate retrieval of USCIS records that often overlap with ICE/CBP records [7].
4. CBP records and DHS FOIA portals: border apprehension context
CBP records (apprehension, entry/exit, expedited removal and I‑94 records) are obtainable via DHS/CBP FOIA channels and often appear in combined immigration files; DHS instructs requesters to use foia.gov or component portals such as SecureRelease for timely processing [4][8].
5. Deportation Data Project: FOIA‑driven, independent datasets at the individual level
The Deportation Data Project posts original, individual‑level datasets obtained by FOIA requests — arrests (apprehensions), detainers, detentions, encounters and removals — and provides documentation explaining fields, duplicate flags and cautions about removals data reliability, making it a leading FOIA‑based resource for independent counts [9][2].
6. Civil‑society FOIA repositories and litigation records: precedent and deep archives
Advocacy groups and legal organizations maintain FOIA repos and litigation productions — for example, the Immigrant Defense Project’s raids FOIA and AALDEF’s step‑by‑step FOIA guidance — that have produced historical evidence about home raids, trainings, and operational practices useful for contextualizing numeric claims [10][11].
7. How‑to guides and database maps: reducing errors in requests
Practical advisories from the ILRC and the American Immigration Council map agency databases and explain how to craft requests for EID, OBIM and other ICE/CBP systems; these guides note systemic backlogs and explain which offices hold particular records, helping journalists target the right component and fields [12][3].
8. What reporters must watch for: delays, redactions and data reliability caveats
FOIA responses from ICE/USCIS/CBP can be severely delayed and are subject to exemptions and redactions; OBIM responses sometimes omit whether an individual left via voluntary return or expedited removal, and the Deportation Data Project flags warnings about the removals dataset’s consistency — all reasons to triangulate counts across agency data, third‑party FOIA datasets and local detainer records [12][2][1].
9. Practical verification workflow for reporters
Start with a targeted FOIA to the relevant component (ICE/CBP/USCIS) via foia.gov or the agency portal, consult ICE FOIA logs to avoid redundant requests, pull FOIA‑obtained individual‑level datasets from Deportation Data Project and civil‑society archives, and use ILRC/AIC documentation to interpret database fields; be transparent about data gaps and agency caveats in reporting [8][6][9][3][12].