How many National Guard personnel were actually activated to support ICE in each state, and what were their roles?
Executive summary
A Pentagon request sought up to 1,700 National Guard personnel from about 20 states to provide administrative, logistical and case‑management support to ICE, but actual activations were smaller, patchy, and varied by state — with detailed, confirmed numbers publicly reported for only a handful of states (Nevada 35; Idaho 14; Florida 200; Iowa 20) and many other states authorizing or reviewing support without clear activation counts [1] [2]. Roles were overwhelmingly non‑custodial and clerical — form‑filling, record maintenance, call handling, bookkeeping, report preparation, case management and vehicle maintenance — and most governors and the Guard emphasized troops would not have direct contact with detainees [1] [2].
1. The federal request and the intended mission
In late July the Defense Department asked roughly 20 states to provide up to 1,700 Guard troops to support expanding ICE detention operations, specifying duties such as case management, logistics and clerical work while keeping the forces under governor control (Title 32) rather than federalizing them for law enforcement tasks [1]. Reporting made clear the Pentagon pulled back plans to use Marines and Reserve forces because the work could involve close contact with migrants, prompting a pivot to National Guard personnel who would remain under state command [1].
2. States with confirmed activations and exact counts
A small set of states publicly confirmed concrete numbers: Nevada approved 35 volunteer soldiers to work with ICE through mid‑November, doing clerical and vehicle‑maintenance tasks and explicitly barred from direct detainee contact [1]. Idaho’s National Guard said it would provide 14 personnel for clerical support across three ICE offices [1]. Florida confirmed the largest reported single‑state activation, authorizing up to 200 Guardsmen to work at nine ICE facilities, with 25 actually activated as of Aug. 8 [1]. Iowa’s governor directed 20 Guardsmen to a Title 32 mission supporting ICE administrative work through Nov. 15 [2] [1]. Those are the clearest, source‑documented tallies available in the reporting reviewed [1] [2].
3. States with partial plans, reviews or reported mission descriptions
Several other states appeared on maps or in briefings as having authorizations, requests under review, or planned deployments but without public, state‑by‑state activation totals: South Dakota’s Operation Prairie Thunder included processing roles; Louisiana planned about 70 guardsmen “by month’s end”; South Carolina had a request for roughly 40 under review; and a list of other states were reported as authorized but without immediate activation, including Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Wyoming [2]. Stars and Stripes and Newsweek cross‑checked many of these but did not publish comprehensive, contemporaneous per‑state activation tables beyond the handful named [1] [2].
4. Roles, restrictions and operational control
Across the reporting, the Guard’s assigned duties were administrative and logistical: form‑filling, record maintenance, call handling, bookkeeping, report preparation, case management and vehicle maintenance — explicitly framed to free up ICE officers for field work — and multiple governors stated Guardsmen would not have direct contact with detainees [1] [2]. Legal and operational context matters: governors retain command under Title 32 and the Posse Comitatus limits federal military law enforcement roles unless federalized under Title 10 or an Insurrection Act invocation, a point highlighted by advocacy groups and legal explainers [3] [1].
5. Exceptions, politically sensitive activations, and reporting gaps
Some high‑profile cases blurred lines: Minnesota’s governor activated the state National Guard to support local law enforcement and first responders amid intense clashes tied to ICE operations and protests — that mobilization focused on crowd management, scene security and support for emergency responders rather than clerical work inside ICE offices [4] [5] [6]. Separately, historical and extraordinary federal federalizations (for example reporting that California troops were federalized in 2025) are documented in some sources but reflect different legal authorities and circumstances than the 2025 Pentagon request [7] [3]. Crucially, many news accounts and maps list authorizations, requests or planned force ceilings but do not reconcile them into a definitive per‑state activated‑personnel ledger; public reporting reliably provides exact counts for only a handful of states [1] [2].
6. Bottom line and limits of the public record
The best public evidence shows a federal request for up to 1,700 Guard troops, with confirmed activations in at least Nevada , Idaho , Florida and Iowa , and other states authorizing or reviewing deployments with varying role descriptions emphasizing non‑custodial, administrative support; however, absence of a published, official, consolidated state‑by‑state activation roster means precise totals for many states cannot be fully verified from the available reporting [1] [2] [3].