US: Controversy over ICE intensifies: from bishops to judges, immigration policies are under fire

Further controversy has also been sparked by the suggestion, reported by the New York Times, that the investigative procedures relating to confrontations involving ICE officers should be amended. In recent days, some federal officials are reported to have been informed that the FBI will no longer handle these investigations, which would be entrusted to Homeland Security Investigations, an internal division of the Department of Homeland Security. The Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security subsequently denied that the change had been formally adopted, assuring that the FBI will continue to operate in accordance with current procedures. However, the mere fact that the proposal was discussed has fuelled concerns amongst those who fear a reduction in independent oversight of federal agents’ activities.

The battle over Trump’s immigration policy is also being fought in the courts. A federal judge appointed by the President himself has, in fact, dismissed the administration’s appeal against Minnesota’s so-called ‘sanctuary’ laws, which restrict local authorities’ cooperation with federal authorities on immigration enforcement. The White House argued that these provisions violated the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, under which federal law takes precedence over state law. In his ruling, Judge Eric C. Tostrud determined that the contested laws do not discriminate against the federal government in a way that constitutes a constitutional violation, dealing a blow to the administration’s strategy aimed at forcing states to cooperate more actively with ICE.

But one of the most controversial aspects of the new crackdown on immigration concerns unaccompanied minors. An investigation published by the Texas Tribune reveals how some relatives of migrant children and teenagers housed in federal centres were arrested by ICE just as they were trying to gain custody of them. According to lawyers and organisations monitoring these cases, the government is reportedly using child custody procedures as a tool to identify undocumented migrants in the country.

Since the start of Trump’s second term, the administration has introduced numerous changes to the vetting process for family members applying to host unaccompanied minors: from mandatory DNA testing to more restrictive criteria regarding accepted forms of identification. Most notably, the ban preventing the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) – the federal agency responsible for unaccompanied migrant children – from sharing information on potential guardians with ICE has been lifted. In at least some cases documented by the Texas Tribune, officers stated that they had tracked down and arrested family members precisely because of the information received from the ORR.

The consequences are felt directly by the children: in June, around 1,800 children were still being housed in federal facilities. This figure is lower than the numbers recorded at the start of 2025, but the average length of stay in the centres has increased significantly: 117 days in the 2025 financial year, double the average during Trump’s first term and almost three times the figure from ten years ago. Lawyers and paediatricians argue that such lengthy stays can have a significant impact on the mental health of children and undermine their relationships with family members waiting for them outside the reception centres.