Fact check: What is the role of the Naperville Police Department in ICE operations?

1. What witnesses said — startling on-scene accounts that framed the incident as indiscriminate

Homeowner and worker accounts describe ICE agents arriving at job sites and detaining individuals working on roofs, with witnesses reporting ladders knocked down and multiple people taken into custody. These eyewitness narratives emphasized the suddenness and apparent breadth of the enforcement action, producing community alarm and media coverage focused on the human impact ^{[1] [2]}. Such accounts do not, however, specify visible Naperville Police participation; they instead attribute detention actions directly to ICE personnel, leaving open whether local officers supported, observed, or were unaware of the operation.

2. Local reporting captures the scene but not police involvement — gaps in the narrative

News stories chronicled the arrests and resident reactions without documenting clear Naperville Police operational roles, repeatedly noting that ICE agents carried out the detentions. The absence of explicit mention of local police in those reports creates ambiguity: either police were not involved, or their participation was not visible or deemed newsworthy by reporters ^{[1] [2]}. The reporting therefore raises an evidentiary question about interagency coordination and whether municipal actors were notified, present, or constrained by policy from intervening.

3. Police policy context — Illinois limitations on local collaboration with ICE

A separate source records a law enforcement statement clarifying that Illinois law restricts municipal assistance to federal immigration enforcement, and that local police are primarily responsible for criminal — not immigration — enforcement actions ^[3]. This policy context indicates a structural reason why Naperville Police would likely not actively conduct or facilitate ICE arrests, framing municipal non-involvement as a legal and procedural posture rather than mere omission in reporting.

4. Reconciling eyewitness reports with departmental policy — two compatible possibilities

The combination of on-the-ground witness descriptions and the department’s policy statement supports two compatible explanations: ICE conducted the operation independently within city limits, or ICE coordinated discreetly with federal partners without formal municipal action by Naperville Police. Both scenarios fit the evidence: the visible actors were ICE agents, and the department’s legal limitations explain an absence of local enforcement involvement ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The record does not, however, provide direct proof of either formal notification or explicit refusal to cooperate by local police.

5. What’s missing — records, statements, and interagency data the reporting did not provide

Key missing elements prevent definitive attribution of role: an official Naperville Police statement on the specific incident, ICE travel or operation summaries, and documentation of any 287(g) or other cooperative agreements (none cited). The sources do not include police incident reports or a timeline of interagency contacts that would confirm whether Naperville Police were notified, present, or asked to assist. Without those documents, attribution of active participation to the Naperville Police Department remains unsupported by the available reporting ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

6. Multiple viewpoints and potential agendas in the coverage

Media coverage emphasized emotional community reaction and procedural surprise, while law enforcement statements focused on legal boundaries protecting municipal independence from federal immigration operations. The coverage reflects two agendas: community advocates highlighting civil‑liberties concerns and law enforcement emphasizing statutory limits and role clarity. Both framings are consistent with the facts presented, but the absence of cross‑checked official records means readers should treat testimonial reporting and institutional statements as complementary but incomplete pieces of the overall picture ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

7. Bottom line and what questions remain for verification

Current evidence shows ICE carried out arrests of roofers in Naperville and local law enforcement policy limits municipal involvement in federal immigration enforcement; however, no source here documents Naperville Police actively participating in the ICE operation. To move from uncertainty to definitive attribution, obtain the Naperville Police incident report, any ICE operational notice to local agencies, and public statements from both ICE and Naperville Police specific to the September 2025 arrests. That documentation would resolve whether the department merely observed, was notified, or played an operational role ^{[1] [2] [3]}.