Has ICE violated policies by arresting at schools recently?

1. Legal background and the policy change that matters

A 2011 ICE policy required supervisors to approve arrests in "sensitive locations" such as schools, but the Trump administration’s DHS revised that approach in January 2025, stating agents may carry out enforcement in those places to apprehend criminal aliens, eliminating the prior categorical protection and authorizing actions when deemed necessary for public safety—this administrative shift is documented by civil-legal groups and education reporters tracking the change ^[5][1][2].

2. What "allowed" means in practice: DHS statements versus enforcement data

DHS publicly insisted that it is “not conducting enforcement operations at, or ‘raiding,’ schools” and denied targeting children, while simultaneously arguing that arrests may occur in schools if a dangerous person flees there or an employee poses a threat, language that preserves discretion for agents ^[4]; independent and local reporting, plus analysis of ICE’s broader shift toward community-based arrests in 2025, shows the agency escalated at-large operations across neighborhoods—which increases the statistical likelihood of encounters near or at schools even if DHS contests the notion of coordinated “school raids” ^[6][7].

3. Reported incidents and competing accounts

There are contemporaneous reports of enforcement actions involving schools and school staff—local outlets in Minneapolis described federal agents entering a high school, witnesses alleging tear gas and staff arrests while DHS denied use of tear gas; other outlets and congressional offices have flagged arrests of students and school employees around the same period, prompting demands for information from members of Congress ^[3][8][9]. These reports conflict with DHS’s public posture and highlight a gap between federal messaging and what some communities are reporting.

4. Legal and constitutional concerns raised by critics

Civil-rights advocates, educators and some legal analysts argue that warrantless, disruptive enforcement in schools risks violating Fourth Amendment protections, chilling attendance and running afoul of Plyler v. Doe’s protections for access to public education—these concerns underlay lawsuits and advice school districts sought as they prepared for possible encounters with agents after the policy reversal ^[5][10][2].

5. Political framing, incentives and who benefits from each narrative

DHS and Homeland Security messaging emphasizes public safety and removing “criminal aliens,” framing school enforcement as necessary when dangerous individuals are involved and pushing back on what it calls smears, which serves the administration’s law-and-order posture ^[11][4]; opponents emphasize trauma, constitutional risk and deterrence of children from school, a narrative that mobilizes education advocates and Democrats and has provoked congressional inquiries—both sides have clear political incentives to shape public perception ^[11][8].

6. Bottom line: have policies been violated?

Based on available reporting, ICE is operating under a DHS policy that permits arrests in schools, so the act of making an arrest at or near a school is not necessarily a policy violation under the current federal guidance; however, credible allegations about tactics (tear gas, detentions of staff or students, warrantless actions) and legal questions about probable cause, warrants and constitutionality have been raised and are the subject of local reporting, lawsuits and congressional scrutiny—those specific claims, if proven, could amount to violations of statutory or constitutional protections even if they do not violate agency guidance as written ^[1][3][5][8].