Immigrant Detention: The Human and Economic Costs

SAN FRANCISCO, CA – The MacArthur Justice Center, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California (ACLU NorCal) filed a FOIA lawsuit against U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to demand the disclosure of policies and documents relating to their practices of targeting and retaliating against people who film federal agents in public. “People in a democracy have the right to document what armed federal agents are doing on the streets of their cities, and to share that video without fear of arrest or retribution,” said Jonathan Manes, senior counsel at the MacArthur Justice Center. "Video of police misconduct has been a core part of American political life since at least the civil rights era, when images of police brutalizing peaceful protestors shocked the nation’s conscience. The federal Government has adopted widespread practices that appear designed to stifle this kind of free speech. The public has a right to know the nature and extent of DHS’s effort to target people who dare to film its agents deployed on our streets.” Federal courts have repeatedly affirmed the right to film law enforcement in public and to disseminate the footage. But a startling pattern of retaliation against people exercising that right has emerged: federal agents have threatened and harassed individuals engaged in recording and publishing videos of immigration agents conducting their work in public; surveilled them; and even detained and arrested them. DHS has also issued administrative subpoenas to third-party tech companies like Google and Reddit demanding access to private information about people who record and publish video footage of ICE agents. Despite DHS’s clear pattern of abuse, there is a basic lack of transparency about the DHS policies, directives, and legal interpretations that have enabled this widespread practice. The public is also in the dark about how frequently DHS has used its arrest and subpoena authorities to target people who film agents. “It’s often been said that sunlight is the best disinfectant,” said Byul Yoon, legal fellow with the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project at the ACLU. “Recording federal agents allows the people to hold the government accountable for abuses of power and misconduct, and the First Amendment guarantees our ability to do so. The pattern of retaliation, as well as the secrecy around the government’s policies, is deeply alarming: a government that fears a phone camera, or a FOIA request, is one that has something to hide. Our democracy deserves better.” In November 2025, the ACLU and ACLU NorCal submitted a FOIA request to DHS, CBP, ICE, and USCIS for access to public records that would answer these and related questions, including policies, legal memos, and training materials. Over six months later, the government has not released a single document in response or explained why any of the materials are properly kept secret. This flouts the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which exists to guarantee prompt public access to information about what the government is doing. The lawsuit can be viewed here.

WASHINGTON – The House passed a reconciliation bill today that would provide an additional $70 billion in taxpayer funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol without any meaningful reforms to limit violent and abusive tactics by federal agents. The vote comes just days after the Senate voted to pass the bill and after a months-long standoff between members of Congress over whether to include reforms in any bill to fund ICE and Border Patrol, prompting Republicans in Congress to bypass normal procedures and use an obscure hyper partisan process called reconciliation. During that time, more than half a million people joined the ACLU in urging their members of Congress to reject any blank checks for ICE and Border Patrol’s lawlessness. In response to this news, Kate Voigt, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, had the following reaction: “It is unconscionable that the House would vote to write yet another blank check for ICE and Border Patrol’s campaign of chaos without any reforms. Over the past several months we’ve seen these abusive agencies kill our neighbors, harass and racially profile people, and tear thousands of families apart. “Once again, the House has shown that it is more committed to standing in President Trump’s good graces than fighting for the needs of the constituents they were elected to represent. The ACLU – and the more than half a million supporters who wrote their members of Congress to demand they reject this bill – will not forget how our members of Congress chose to abandon that responsibility.”

WASHINGTON – The Senate passed a reconciliation bill today that would provide an additional $70 billion in taxpayer funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol without any meaningful reforms to limit violent and abusive tactics by federal agents. The vote comes after a months-long standoff between members of Congress over funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), prompting Republicans in Congress to bypass normal Congressional procedures and use an obscure hyper partisan process called reconciliation. In July 2025, Congress also used the reconciliation process to give DHS over $170 billion in immigration enforcement funding – $150 billion of which remains unused, according to a recent analysis. In response to this news, Kate Voigt, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, had the following reaction: “Once again, President Trump’s allies in Congress are bypassing normal Congressional procedures to strong-arm billions more in taxpayer dollars to fuel ICE and Border Patrol’s assault on our communities. Instead of passing commonsense reforms to rein in ICE abuses or funding programs that would actually help American families, the Senate is choosing to add $70 billion to ICE and Border Patrol’s already bloated budget. “Make no mistake: a vote in favor of more ICE and Border Patrol funding is a vote to prioritize President Trump’s cruel mass deportation agenda. We now call on our House Representatives to hold the line and say no to any more funding for these abusive agencies that have killed and attacked our neighbors, demanded people show their papers based on the color of their skin, and tear thousands of families apart. The safety of our communities and our freedom depend on it.”  

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Tennessee, and National Immigration Law Center filed a federal class-action lawsuit today challenging a new Tennessee law, HB 1704, that unconstitutionally usurps federal immigration enforcement power by making it a crime for certain immigrants to remain in the state. Courts across the country have repeatedly reaffirmed that immigration enforcement is a power that belongs exclusively to the federal government — not the states. Tennessee’s law, however, creates a new crime for people with final removal orders who have not left the state. HB 1704 is part of a larger framework of new extreme anti-immigration state laws aimed at criminalizing noncitizens’ presence within a state either by punishing entry, or in this case, lack of departure. “The rule has been clear for well over a century: Immigration enforcement is exclusively a federal power. The state’s overreach here is unlawful and inhumane, creating fear and upending lives for families, neighbors, and communities across Tennessee,” said Hannah Steinberg, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. Plaintiffs in this case include: A 35-year-old Memphis resident who came to the United States on a visa when he was very young. His family applied for asylum, but the application was denied, and he was ordered removed when he was a teenager. He later applied for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and has had DACA ever since. He has lived in Memphis for decades and fears he will now be arrested, detained, and prosecuted under the state’s new failure-to-depart law. A 58-year-old woman who arrived in the United States a quarter century ago on a visitor’s visa. After she applied for asylum, her application was denied and she was issued a removal order. She has applied for relief under the Violence Against Women Act. For the past 25 years, she has lived in Memphis. Her entire life is in Tennessee — her sons, including one U.S. citizen son who is starting college and she financially supports; her job, where she has worked for decades; her doctors and immigration lawyer; and her friends and neighbors. She too now lives in fear. “HB 1704 would threaten our neighbors who have families here and have lived here for years,” said Zee Scout, staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee. “This is yet another example of the state of Tennessee improperly wielding its power to baselessly attack neighbors and families who make this a better, richer state for all. We are filing this case to defend our communities against this unconstitutional law.” “HB 1704 does exactly what courts have warned states not to do for decades. It is a cruel and unlawful attempt to punish people just for living in Tennessee, and the state has no authority to enact this new law,” said Peter McGraw, deputy legal director at the National Immigration Law Center. The lawsuit seeks to block the new law from taking effect on July 1. The complaint is here.