New data paints a stark portrait of current U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) practices: while the agency is detaining a majority of individuals without serious criminal history, it is capturing only a small fraction of undocumented immigrants convicted of violent crimes—despite public assurance to prioritize its efforts there.
1. Cato Institute: 65% of ICE Detainees Had No Criminal Conviction
According to internal ICE data shared with the Cato Institute, from October 1, 2024 to June 14, 2025:
- ICE processed 204,297 book-ins, of which 133,687 (65%) had no criminal convictions.
- Over 93% of detainees had never been convicted of violent crimes, and around 90% lacked convictions for violent or property offenses.
- Among those convicted, most convictions were for immigration violations, traffic issues, or nonviolent vice crimes.
The rise in non-criminal interior detentions aligns with a shift in enforcement policies following directives from the White House aiming for more interior arrests—often described by agency staff as “quantity over quality,” potentially leaving dangerous individuals unapprehended.
2. NBC News: Only 6% of Known Immigrant Murderers Arrested
While ICE touts its efforts toward targeting the “worst of the worst,” internal agency figures reported to NBC News reveal a different reality:
- Between October 1, 2024 and May 31, 2025, ICE booked 185,042 undocu men t ed immigrants, of whom 65,041 had criminal convictions.
- That includes 752 individuals convicted of homicide and 1,693 convicted of sexual assault.
- However, ICE had previously told Congress in September that over 13,099 undocumented murderers and 15,811 sexual assault offenders were known to be in the U.S. but not in custody.
- The result? Just 6% of known undocumented murderers and 11% of sexual assault offenders have been arrested.
Congressional Republicans, including Rep. Tony Gonzales (R–TX), have pushed for better targeting of violent offenders, saying that rounding up law-abiding undocumented immigrants diverts law enforcement from genuine threats.
3. Contradiction Between Policy and Practice
These revelations underline a growing disconnect:
- ICE appears to focus heavily on roundups of individuals lacking conviction—despite official guidance emphasizing public-safety threats.
- Meanwhile, only a small share of high-risk criminals (e.g., convicted murderers and rapists) are actually being detained, raising questions about the effectiveness and priorities of interior enforcement.
A senior DHS official told NBC News that tracking and arresting serious offenders is more resource-intensive than targeting those without convictions. The official claims ICE is now deporting anyone without legal status rather than prioritizing “the worst of the worst.”
4. Policy Implications and Calls for Reform
- Transparency: The Cato Institute urges Congress to mandate more detailed reporting from ICE, ensuring interior enforcement is aligned with public safety.
- Prioritization: Legislators—including bipartisan voices—are advocating for policy adjustments so ICE allocates its resources to apprehending documented violent criminals first.
- Operational Balance: Enforcement officials warn that an emphasis on meeting arrest quotas risks releasing dangerous offenders while targeting non-threatening individuals.
Despite rhetorical promises to “remove the worst of the worst,” the data indicates ICE currently removes far more individuals without convictions than serious criminals. This underscores mounting concerns about agency discretion, enforcement priorities, and broader immigration policy strategy.
Sources: Cato Institute (June 20, 2025), NBC News (June 25, 2025).
