Historically, what percentage of ICE arrests were U.S. citizens versus noncitizens nationwide?
Executive summary
Historically, ICE arrests have overwhelmingly involved noncitizens; administrative arrest powers apply to noncitizens and agency statistics and expert analyses indicate U.S. citizens represent a very small fraction of total ICE arrests — commonly estimated at about 1 percent or less — though occasional wrongful citizen detentions draw notable attention [1] [2] [3]. Available public reporting and agency descriptions also make clear that ICE’s interior enforcement mission is designed to locate and arrest removable noncitizens, so any citizen arrests are exceptions or errors rather than the norm [4] [1].
1. Historical baseline: ICE’s mission and who it is empowered to arrest
ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) is legally chartered to arrest, detain and remove noncitizens who violate immigration laws in the interior of the United States, and ICE administrative arrests — the majority of ERO activity — are directed at people who are not U.S. citizens [1] [4]. That statutory and operational framework means that, by design, the vast bulk of ICE arrests should be of noncitizens; public tallies of ICE activity confirm large annual arrest totals concentrated on immigration violations rather than general criminal law enforcement [1].
2. What the numbers say: noncitizen dominance, citizen arrests as a sliver
Recent compilations and reporting show the numerical reality: tens of thousands of ICE arrests per year are routinely recorded — USAFacts counted 149,070 total ICE arrests in FY2024 with 113,430 characterized as administrative arrests by ERO (which by definition target noncitizens) — underscoring that noncitizens make up the vast majority of arrests [1]. Independent researchers have estimated the share of ICE detainees who are U.S. citizens to be very small; Jacqueline Stevens’ work estimated roughly 1 percent of ICE detainees historically have been U.S. citizens, a figure echoed in congressional and academic discussions of citizen detentions [2].
3. Exceptions, errors, and why citizen arrests make headlines
Although rare in percentage terms, citizen arrests by ICE happen and have attracted media exposure and legal challenges; watchdogs and advocacy groups document cases and allege systemic causes such as racial profiling, database errors, or overzealous field practices that can lead to mistaken detention of citizens [3] [5] [6]. The Brennan Center and other advocates emphasize that even if citizens constitute about 1 percent of detainees, that still translates into thousands of wrongful or mistaken detentions across recent years, a fact they use to argue that policy and oversight failures are enabling unlawful detentions [3].
4. Important caveats: data definitions, administrative vs. criminal arrests, and reporting limits
Care is required interpreting the figures: ICE distinguishes administrative arrests (targeting civil immigration violations) from criminal arrests (which can involve citizens and noncitizens alike), and some datasets aggregate different arrest types so direct percentages can be obscured without careful parsing [1]. Multiple organizations note gaps and inconsistencies — for example, leaked internal datasets, FOIA-derived compilations, and advocacy reports often disagree in scope and methodology — so while the long-running pattern is clear (noncitizens predominate), precise year-to-year citizen percentages vary and can be undercounted if short detentions or releases before court never enter public tallies [1] [3] [7].
5. Competing narratives and implicit agendas in the sources
Government sources and neutral explainers stress statutory mission and large noncitizen arrest totals to justify ICE’s actions and to frame citizen detentions as exceptions [1] [4], while advocacy groups and legal observers highlight the human and constitutional harms of wrongful citizen detentions and frame even a small citizen share as evidence of systemic abuse and racial profiling [3] [5] [6]. Academic estimates like Stevens’ are sometimes used by critics to argue the citizen-arrest rate is meaningful in absolute numbers, even if a small percentage, whereas ICE and some analyses emphasize administrative arrests’ focus on noncitizens to rebut claims that citizens are being routinely targeted [2] [1].
6. Bottom line
Across the reporting and datasets available, the historical picture is consistent: nearly all ICE arrests are of noncitizens because that is the agency’s statutory role, and independent estimates place U.S. citizens at around 1 percent (or lower) of ICE detainees historically, with variations and reporting gaps that prevent a single, definitive nationwide fraction but leave no doubt that citizen arrests are rare in percentage terms even while their consequences are widely debated [1] [2] [3].