Emergency Hotline: Call 1-844-363-1423 (United We Dream Hotline)
ICE Encounter

Overview

Federal immigration agencies have built an extensive surveillance and data analytics infrastructure. Understanding these systems is essential for legal advocacy, privacy protection, and informed civic engagement.


Biometric Infrastructure

The HART System

DHS is transitioning its legacy biometric database (IDENT) to the Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology System (HART), managed by the Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM).

HART Capabilities

Data Type Description
Facial recognition Photographs from multiple sources
Fingerprints 10-print and latent prints
Iris scans High-resolution iris images
Biographic data Names, dates of birth, addresses
Multi-modal linking Cross-references across data types

Population Covered

HART is designed to store hundreds of millions of records including:

  • U.S. citizens
  • Lawful permanent residents
  • Foreign nationals

GAO Findings on HART

The Government Accountability Office (GAO-23-105959) classified HART as a severe programmatic failure:

Metric Original Current
Cost estimate $4.2 billion $6.158 billion
Completion date 2021 Delayed ~5 years
Contract deliverables Expected Failed all

Privacy Deficits

GAO reports indicate the program lacks basic privacy assurances regarding:

  • Partner agency data retention
  • Foreign government access
  • Data disposal procedures
  • PII security for DOJ Next Generation Identification System users

Data Analytics Platforms

Palantir Investigative Case Management (ICM)

ICE relies heavily on Palantir Technologies for data processing. The ICM system replaced the legacy TECS system.

ICM Capabilities

Based on FOIA documents:

  • Links investigative records across sources
  • Maintains "Interface Hub" to pull external data
  • Stores telecommunications data from subpoenas
  • Creates comprehensive individual profiles

Contract Scope

Contract Amount
ICM base contract $115+ million
ImmigrationOS expansion $30 million
Total $145+ million

ImmigrationOS Platform

The newest Palantir system utilizes artificial intelligence to:

  • Aggregate disparate public and private data streams
  • Process data regardless of veracity
  • Access IRS tax data
  • Access passport records
  • Access license-plate reader data
  • Enable rapid, automated enforcement decisions

Commercial Location Data

Carpenter v. United States (2018)

The Supreme Court ruled that the government generally requires a warrant to access historical cell-site location information.

The Bypass: Data Brokers

To circumvent constitutional requirements, DHS components purchase access to location data from private commercial brokers.

Documented Contracts

FOIA litigation by ACLU and EFF revealed purchases from:

  • Venntel - Cell phone location data
  • Babel Street - Location analytics

Capabilities Purchased

  • Track historical movements from workplaces to homes
  • Monitor city blocks
  • Track devices over time
  • Execute mass surveillance without:
    • Judicial oversight
    • Probable cause
    • Warrants

Agencies Involved

  • ICE
  • CBP
  • Secret Service
  • Coast Guard

Legislative Response

Privacy advocates have called for passage of the "Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act" to close the commercial data loophole.


State Database Access

DMV Data Access

Nineteen states and D.C. allow undocumented residents to obtain driver's licenses. Many have statutory bars limiting information sharing with ICE.

Case Study: Washington State

Despite the Keep Washington Working Act explicitly prohibiting use of state resources for civil immigration enforcement:

Finding Detail
Query volume 2.6 million queries in 11 months
Access method Nlets and ACCESS interface
Data accessed License plates, driver photographs
Usage Facial recognition, targeted stops

IRS Data Sharing

In April 2025, IRS and ICE entered a Memorandum of Understanding allowing:

  • ICE to bypass court orders
  • Direct request of taxpayer's last known address
  • Investigation of 8 U.S.C. ยง 1253(a)(1) violations (willfully remaining after removal order)

Legal Basis

Relies on exception in Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Impact

  • Enables neighborhood-level enforcement
  • Targets individuals and employers
  • Erodes taxpayer trust in confidentiality

Parallel Construction

Definition

A practice where agencies:

  1. Use sensitive, secret, or constitutionally questionable surveillance to locate a target
  2. Artificially engineer a separate, conventional evidentiary basis
  3. Use the "clean" evidence to justify arrest

Example Pattern

  1. Locate individual through warrantless commercial location data
  2. Orchestrate routine traffic stop for minor violation (broken taillight)
  3. Arrest based on traffic stop
  4. Conceal original surveillance method from court

Legal Impact

  • Deprives defendants of ability to challenge original search
  • Insulates surveillance techniques from judicial review
  • Undermines due process principles

Facial Recognition

Sources Used

  • DMV photographs
  • Passport database
  • Visa application photos
  • Mugshot databases
  • Social media (documented but extent unclear)

Accuracy Concerns

Studies have documented:

  • Higher false positive rates across racial/ethnic groups
  • Particular concerns for darker-skinned individuals
  • Limited testing on diverse populations

Implications for Communities

Risk Awareness

Understanding surveillance helps individuals:

  1. Make informed decisions about data sharing
  2. Understand potential exposure from everyday activities
  3. Assess risks of various digital and physical activities

Legal Advocacy

Attorneys can:

  1. Challenge evidence obtained through unconstitutional surveillance
  2. Request discovery on data sources
  3. Argue parallel construction if suspected

Policy Advocacy

Understanding these systems supports:

  1. Legislative efforts to close loopholes
  2. State-level data protection laws
  3. Oversight and transparency requirements

Related Resources