Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which groups are prioritized for deportation under the Trump administration's current ICE policies?
Executive summary
The Trump administration’s stated ICE priorities center on mass deportations focused on large, Democratic-run cities (explicitly naming Los Angeles, Chicago and New York) and on people the administration labels “criminal illegal aliens,” while internal documents and reporting show broadening tactics—expanded data access, leadership shake‑ups and standing arrest targets—that sweep in many without criminal records (Trump named cities as targets [1]; ICE leadership changes to speed removals are reported by AP and New York Times [2] [3]). Coverage shows disagreement about who's actually being removed: officials claim criminal priority while investigative reports and data show large numbers without convictions are being detained and deported (administration claim vs. reporting on detainee profiles [4] [5]).
1. Trump’s public order: Democratic-run cities and “mass deportation”
President Trump publicly ordered ICE to “expand efforts to detain and deport” in America’s largest, Democratic‑run cities, explicitly naming Los Angeles, Chicago and New York as targets and promising what he called “the single largest mass deportation programme in history” [1] [6]. Media outlets note the announcement was framed politically and triggered nationwide protests and pushback from city officials [7] [6].
2. Official priority language: “Criminal illegal aliens” vs. practice
White House and DHS messaging emphasize prioritizing the arrest and removal of people with criminal records — the “worst of the worst” — and senior officials have repeatedly framed deportation efforts as criminal‑focused [2] [3]. Yet multiple news investigations and data reviews find that a substantial share of those detained by ICE lack criminal convictions, and reporting documents increases in interior arrests and deportations that do not align neatly with stated criminal‑only priorities (El País reports only 35% of those detained had criminal records compared with 65% in Oct 2024; NBC notes ICE identified 435,000 unauthorized immigrants with convictions but has limited capacity to arrest them all) [4] [5].
3. Operational changes: leadership shake‑ups and arrest targets
To push enforcement, the administration has reassigned or plans to replace numerous ICE field office leaders and set more aggressive arrest targets (reported reassignments of at least half of ICE field directors; plans to speed deportations and frustration over meeting a goal of 1 million deportations) [2] [3] [8]. Reporting cites internal pressures — including a reported target to arrest thousands per day — that risk prioritization being subordinated to numerical goals [8].
4. Tools widening the net: data access and local cooperation
Policy and programmatic changes have expanded ICE’s access to government and commercial databases and revived aggressive information‑sharing practices, making it easier to locate and arrest removable non‑citizens across jurisdictions (Migration Policy Institute analysis on data/records access) [9]. Axios’s review also shows ICE is deploying resources where local cooperation exists (287(g) agreements) and that enforcement intensity varies by state and city [7].
5. Detention, private contractors, and outcomes
Reporting describes a surge in detention as the standard prelude to deportation, reliance on private prison contractors like CoreCivic and GEO Group to expand capacity, and a drop in releases on bond — trends that expand the practical reach of deportations beyond legally prioritized categories (El País coverage on detention and contractor use; NPR on hiring to support detention expansion and concerns about deaths in custody) [4] [10]. These operational choices influence who is ultimately deported because detention makes removal more likely [4].
6. Conflicting narratives and political incentives
There are clear political incentives shaping both rhetoric and tactics: the administration touts deportation totals to meet campaign promises and to signal toughness, while critics say the administration is using broad enforcement and data tools to sweep up undocumented people regardless of criminality (Trump’s stated goals and metrics vs. reporting on inflated or politicized presentation of deportations) [1] [11]. Some reporting warns that leadership purges and arrest quotas may prioritize speed and optics over legally narrow targeting [3] [8].
7. What available sources do not specify or resolve
Available sources do not provide a definitive, publicly released ICE memo listing an exact prioritized categories hierarchy under current orders (not found in current reporting). They also do not reconcile the administration’s stated criminal‑first priority with internal data on the share of detainees without convictions into a single official accounting—journalistic sources document the discrepancy but no single authoritative ICE publication in the provided results resolves it [4] [5].
Conclusion — what this means on the ground: official guidance emphasizes deporting criminals and expanding raids in major Democratic cities, but investigative reporting and internal data cited by outlets show enforcement practices, expanded data use and detention policies that sweep in many without criminal records and vary by local cooperation and operational targets [1] [9] [4] [7]. Readers should weigh the administration’s stated priorities against on‑the‑ground reporting and internal data highlighted by journalists.