Which official DHS statements or documents list cities that received ICE surge deployments in 2025–2026?
Executive summary
The only clear, named DHS announcement in the provided reporting that specifies a city receiving a large ICE surge is the Department of Homeland Security’s declaration of “Operation Metro Surge,” which deployed sustained federal immigration enforcement to the Minneapolis–Saint Paul metropolitan area (Minneapolis–St. Paul) in December 2025–January 2026 [1] Minnesota-ICE-Deployment" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[2] [3]. Beyond that, official DHS statements and related documents in the sources offer scattered mentions of local enforcement actions or arrests in particular places but do not, in the documents cited here, publish a single comprehensive public list of every city that received a surge deployment in 2025–2026 [4] [5].
1. The DHS announcement that names Minneapolis–Saint Paul (Operation Metro Surge)
Multiple sources record that DHS publicly framed the Minnesota deployment as a discrete operation called “Operation Metro Surge” and described it as the largest immigration enforcement operation the department had undertaken, naming the Minneapolis–Saint Paul metropolitan area as the focus of the surge and reporting the deployment of roughly 2,000 agents there [1] [2] [3] [5].
2. DHS press materials and recaps that mention enforcement actions in specific localities
DHS’s own press materials released during this period included recaps of high-profile enforcement actions and named locations where ICE made arrests (for example, a DHS news release highlighted individual arrests and locations such as Colorado Springs) — but these recaps are case-by-case summaries of “worst of the worst” enforcement actions rather than a systematic catalogue of surge deployments by city [4].
3. DHS spokespeople, social posts and agency briefings that signaled nationwide deployments but lacked a master list
DHS spokespeople and official social-media posts publicly boasted of expanded deployments and arrests across the country and confirmed that new recruits were “on the ground across the country,” but the quoted officials declined to disclose complete deployment figures or an itemized city-by-city list in the available reporting [5] [6] [7].
4. Court filings and local government documents that document a Minneapolis surge but don’t substitute for a DHS list
State and municipal legal filings rely on and quote DHS actions — for example, Minnesota’s federal complaint and related city statements describe Operation Metro Surge and seek to halt DHS deployments in Minneapolis and Saint Paul — but these documents reflect litigation about one operation rather than an official DHS roster of surge cities [8] [9].
5. Reporting and policy analyses that identify other city operations but cite non‑DHS sources
Investigative and policy reporting assembled by outside outlets and think tanks name other major interior enforcement operations — for example, a Chicago “Operation Midway Blitz” and extended deployments to several Democratic-led cities — but those accounts synthesize DHS hiring data, local reporting and observer counts rather than pointing to a single DHS document that lists all surge cities [10] [11]. These secondary sources corroborate that DHS sent large numbers of agents “to several prominent Democratic-led US cities” but do not replace an explicit DHS-published list [11].
6. Key limitation and conclusion: no comprehensive DHS city list found in provided sources
Across the reporting supplied, the strongest official evidence is DHS’s naming of Operation Metro Surge for the Minneapolis–Saint Paul deployment and DHS press recaps that mention enforcement actions in particular localities [1] [2] [3] [4], while spokespeople statements and outside reporting indicate broader nationwide surges [5] [6] [7] [11] [10]. However, the materials provided do not include a single DHS public statement or document that compiles a definitive, comprehensive list of every city that received an ICE “surge deployment” in 2025–2026; that absence is the central reporting limitation and explains why researchers and local officials have used litigation and local reporting to reconstruct where surges occurred [8] [9].