Have there been recent endorsements or criticisms of ICE by major police organizations?
Executive summary
Major police organizations and federal law‑enforcement groups have offered a mixture of criticism, caution and implicit support toward ICE in recent months: national policing forums have flagged immigration enforcement as a fraught operational challenge and urged careful handling, federal law‑enforcement leaders have asked for patience after a high‑profile agent‑involved shooting, while DHS and some pro‑enforcement voices have publicly lauded ICE’s surge in arrests and hires [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. National police forums: concern and caution, not blanket endorsement
Leading police policy forums and associations have framed immigration enforcement as a major operational and trust problem for local agencies rather than issuing broad endorsements of ICE policy, with the Police Executive Research Forum noting that immigration enforcement “emerged as a major challenge for police departments and sheriffs’ offices” in 2025 and urging attention to community impacts as policing priorities shift [1] [5].
2. Federal law‑enforcement community calls for restraint after violence
After an ICE agent‑involved shooting in Minneapolis, leaders within the federal law‑enforcement community publicly urged patience and warned that inflammatory rhetoric could erode public trust, signaling concern about the political fallout rather than a direct institutional endorsement of ICE operations [2].
3. DHS and administration communications have strongly backed ICE operations
The Department of Homeland Security and other administration channels have repeatedly praised ICE’s intensified enforcement, touting “worst of the worst” arrests and large hiring gains as accomplishments and framing expanded interior enforcement as necessary public‑safety work—positions that amount to explicit federal endorsement even as they inflame local controversy [3] [4] [6].
4. Prosecutors, civil‑rights groups and some local officials have mounted public criticism
State prosecutors and civil‑rights organizations have moved from private concern to public investigation and legal action: New York’s attorney general set up a portal to collect evidence of alleged federal misconduct, the ACLU has sued over suspicionless stops and alleged abuses, and reporters and analysts document an uptick in complaints about racial profiling and excessive force that prompt calls for oversight [7] [8] [9].
5. Local elected officials and sheriffs are split — politics amplify the divide
Tensions between independent sheriffs who seek closer collaboration with ICE and state or municipal limits on cooperation have surfaced in electoral politics and policy debates, with some candidates campaigning explicitly to deputize local police as immigration agents while state rules and public resistance constrain widespread local endorsement [10].
6. Data, staffing and accountability debates shape police organizations’ positions
The debate is grounded in concrete changes: ICE doubled hiring in 2025 and reported thousands of arrests, which supporters point to as reason for operational alignment, while policing scholars and watchdogs point to data inconsistencies and shifting ICE reporting categories that complicate oversight and fuel calls for DOJ pattern‑and‑practice reviews [4] [11] [9] [10].
7. What this means for understanding “endorsement” versus “criticism”
“Endorsement” of ICE from major police organizations is limited and situational—administration and DHS messaging offer explicit institutional support, some local sheriffs seek closer ties, and a federal law‑enforcement community sought calm after a shooting; by contrast, prominent policing policy groups, prosecutors, civil‑rights NGOs and many local leaders have been critical or cautious, demanding accountability and warning about community harm [3] [4] [1] [7] [8].
Bottom line
Recent statements and actions from across the policing landscape reflect both endorsements and strong criticisms of ICE: federal and DHS channels have loudly backed the agency’s expanded enforcement and hiring, while police policy organizations, prosecutors and civil‑rights groups have expressed concern, urged restraint, opened investigations or sued—so the record is mixed and highly polarized along federal‑local and political lines [3] [4] [1] [7] [8] [2].