Which types of criminal convictions are most common among ICE detainees?
Executive summary
ICE detainees are far more likely to hold convictions for immigration-related offenses or minor nonviolent crimes—especially traffic violations—than violent felonies; multiple analyses report traffic and immigration offenses as the single most common convictions and find violent convictions in the low single digits of the detained population [1] [2] [3]. At the same time, a large and growing share of people in ICE custody have no criminal convictions at all, a fact that complicates claims from DHS that enforcement is focused on the “worst of the worst” [3] [4] [5].
1. The headline categories: immigration and traffic offenses dominate
Independent tabulations of ICE data and reporting by TRAC and MinnPost identify traffic violations and immigration offenses (such as illegal entry or reentry) as the most frequent convictions among those ICE detains, a pattern that is visible across datasets used by researchers tracking detention populations [1] [2].
2. Violent convictions are rare in relative terms
Analysts at the Cato Institute—and summaries drawing from ICE statistics—consistently find that convictions for violent crimes make up a small share of detainees; one Cato analysis put violent convictions at about 5 percent of the detained population, a figure echoed in other parses of ICE’s public data [3].
3. Many detainees have no convictions, and that share has grown
Multiple data investigations note that a plurality or majority of detained people have no criminal convictions: press analyses using ICE’s own numbers put the non‑convicted share between roughly 65 and 73 percent at different points in 2025, and reporting and trackers have documented that much of the growth in detention has come from people without convictions [3] [6] [4] [7].
4. Pending charges and classification choices muddy the picture
ICE and DHS often bundle people with pending charges into “criminal arrests,” while researchers warn that pending charges are frequently minor or later dismissed; this classification practice inflates the appearance of criminality in administratively released counts and is a recurring critique from groups analyzing ICE data [3] [8].
5. The official narrative vs. the data: competing agendas
DHS and ICE messaging highlights arrests of “drug traffickers” and violent offenders to justify expanded enforcement and staffing, using vivid examples to frame policy priorities, but public data and outside analyses contradict the notion that detention is primarily of violent criminals—feeding a political narrative mismatch between agency portrayals and independent counts [9] [10] [3] [7].
6. Exceptions and high‑profile violent cases do not change aggregate patterns
High‑profile detainees with serious or sexual‑violent convictions appear in press releases and investigative lists, and these cases are real and consequential, yet they are exceptions rather than the statistical norm; comprehensive trackers and news investigations stress that such cases coexist with a much larger number of detainees whose convictions are immigration or minor traffic offenses, or who have no conviction at all [11] [2] [1].
7. Data limitations and what remains unclear
Public ICE datasets are periodically updated and categorized in ways that can vary over time; investigators warn that month‑to‑month shifts, differing definitions (convicted vs. charged), and the timing of arrests/transfers mean precise shares can change and require careful, time‑bounded analysis—several of the cited analyses note those caveats [12] [3] [7].
8. Bottom line
Across the best available public reporting and independent analyses, the most common convictions among ICE detainees are immigration violations and minor offenses such as traffic violations, while violent convictions represent a small minority (roughly mid‑single digits in cited analyses); moreover, a substantial and rising share of the detained population has no criminal conviction, underscoring the gap between political rhetoric about “the worst of the worst” and empirical patterns in ICE custody [1] [2] [3] [7] [4].