10 to End ICE

A clear roadmap to ending ICE starts with what we can demand today.

Introducing 10 to End ICE—a list of demands Congress can make right now in response to the harms of ICE.

In our last post, we discussed what Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) does and how the agency’s continued existence is untenable. We promised in our next post we’d discuss the actions necessary to end ICE.

Today, we’re introducing actionable, achievable policies that move us toward abolition. They’re the floor, not the ceiling.

First, we believe ICE should, and can, be immediately abolished.

We know, however, that achieving this goal may require several steps and that the political will may not exist for immediate abolition. With that in mind, we’ve prepared 10 demands Congress can pursue now to dismantle ICE and address the harms it has inflicted on our nation and communities.

Why not just call to abolish ICE and stop there? Without clear demands upfront, policies get watered down and support for substantive change erodes. We’ve seen it happen.

What’s our approach? This roadmap targets ICE’s core structures—funding, due process, agency scope, and redress—with the highest-impact demands that are achievable today. Read more about our approach and the assumptions guiding our demands in the roadmap.

Is there support for this? Public support for ending ICE has grown steadily. As of January 28, 2026, 80% of Democrats, 46% of Independents, and 15% of Republicans support abolishing ICE. And 11% of people are undecided. Importantly, when given further options in another poll, 42% of Republicans support “making significant changes to ICE to put more checks on its power.”

We want to hear from you! If you have ideas or constructive feedback, please email us at ice@campaignzero.org.

The Demands

Federal

Reducing and ultimately abolishing ICE must happen at the federal level. These 10 demands are our floor—actionable, achievable, non-negotiable first steps to end ICE.

1. Cap ICE Staffing Levels.

Even though the Trump administration claims it is targeting “violent criminals” with ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), only about 5% of ICE detainees have convictions for violent offenses. The surge in funding and personnel for ICE, and the excessive deployment of CBP in coordination with ICE, is about power and intimidation, not the enforcement of immigration laws.

The change:

• Reduce ICE to a force of 1,100 officers—costing roughly $200 million annually—which would be sufficient for genuine public safety needs. All other ICE employees must be non-enforcement, meaning they cannot carry a firearm, have no power to arrest or investigate, and have no power to conduct searches.

• Cap CBP at current levels and prohibit them from being deployed to support any other agency operation, including ICE.

Why it matters: These changes force ICE to prioritize operational capacity over large-scale terror and redirect resources toward rights-based alternatives. Any future staffing increase would require explicit legislative approval, public hearings and community input. Limiting CBP's staffing and restricting its deployment prevents the administration from simply transferring ICE operations to another agency.

CBP is already acting far beyond its border-security mandate—militarized deployments to cities, collaboration with ICE, and broad interpretations of federal-property-protection statutes have transformed it into a domestic enforcement tool. Legal restrictions would rein in this mission creep and prevent it from becoming a de facto replacement for a capped ICE.

2. End Warrantless Searches and Shrink CBP’s Jurisdiction

CBP currently has jurisdiction to operate throughout the United States, assisting ICE in immigration enforcement (6 USC 211(c)(8)).

CBP also has legal authority to conduct warrantless searches of any vessel (8 USC § 1357) within a “reasonable distance” from any external boundary of the US (defined as 100 air miles per 8 CFR 287.1(a)(2)). Two-thirds of all Americans live within this zone, effectively creating a Fourth Amendment-free area.

The change:

• Limit CBP jurisdiction to 10 air miles from any external boundary, ensuring the agency’s focus is on the border.

• Remove the legal authority for warrantless searches from federal law—the Constitution should apply everywhere within our land.

Why it matters: CBP should focus on ports of entry and external boundaries, not areas throughout our nation’s interior.

3. Protect Immigration Judges from Political Purges

The Trump administration has fired over 100 immigration judges since 2025—nearly 15% of the bench. With three million pending cases, the system is being intentionally clogged to justify bypassing due process. Congress has tried repeatedly to increase the number of immigration judges to reduce the backlog of pending cases, and it’s been blocked.

The change: Establish the following legal protections:

• The immigration court system should be a standalone, independent entity, similar to all other federal judges

• Judicial tenure with mid-term removal only “for cause”

• Merit-based standards for hiring and removal

• Statutory minimum bench size to prevent wholesale gutting

Why it matters: Independent judges require proper evidence and meaningful hearings, which slow mass deportations and force ICE to document its actions.

4. Cancel Surveillance Contracts and Require Judicial Warrants for Data Collection or Usage

ICE has long abused surveillance technologies and personal data, but its recent funding surge has given it a virtual blank check to expand these capacities and experiment with new technologies with little to no oversight. Many of these technologies were designed for warfare and counterterrorism but are now used to violate Fourth Amendment protections, target neighborhoods, and intimidate protesters.

The change:

• Immediately cancel all ICE and CBP contracts with Palantir, Clearview AI, NEC, Paragon Solutions, and L3Harris.

• Pass legislation requiring a judicial search warrant to obtain or utilize personal data via direct surveillance, purchases from third-party brokers, or inter-agency cooperation.

Why it matters: The solution to this problem lies with Congress to modernize Fourth Amendment protections to safeguard personal and biometric data. In the immediate term, we must end any federal contracts with known bad actors who enable ICE and CBP.

5. Guarantee the Right to a Lawyer in Immigration Court

56% of people facing deportation in Immigration Court lack legal representation, including many children, who are forced to navigate proceedings alone. Given the life-altering consequences, legal representation must be guaranteed.

The change: Amend 8 USC § 1362 to guarantee government-funded representation and case management for all people in immigration proceedings.

Why it matters: Free legal representation is a basic right that should be extended to everyone in our country, not a privilege for those who can afford it.

6. Prohibit ICE From Obtaining New Properties for Immigration Detention

ICE wants to build a massive detention infrastructure capable of detaining 80,000+ individuals. To do so, they have been purchasing warehouses and other facilities throughout the country. ICE’s acting director openly stated his detainment goals and compared the process to Amazon: “Like Prime, but with human beings.”

The change: Prevent ICE from obtaining any new properties for immigration detention or temporary detainment, and roll back its recent expansion.

• To effectuate this change, implement a prohibition on any federal agency purchasing or leasing new properties to be used by ICE for immigration detention or detainment.

• Federal agencies must also sell any property purchased for ICE detainment after January 20, 2025, with cities having the right of first refusal before it is opened to the broader market. Any leases on property must end immediately.

• Prohibit DHS or any other federal agency from purchasing or leasing aircraft or other vessels for deportation or detention purposes related to immigration enforcement.

Why it matters: Studies on alternatives to detention (ATD) programs for immigrants show that 95% of people on full-service ATD appeared for final hearings, with other studies showing even higher rates of compliance. People comply when they are treated as human beings, not prisoners.

7. Ban Private Prison and Detention Contracts

80 to 90% percent of detained immigrants are held in facilities operated by private companies like GEO Group and CoreCivic. These companies lobbied for expanded immigration enforcement and profit significantly from guaranteed minimum payments and bed quotas—they get paid whether beds are filled or not.

The change:

• End all federal contracts with any company or private organization that manages, provides, or supplies any “detention” facility.

• Prohibit private prison and detention contracts in the future.

Why it matters: Private companies reap the benefits of expanded immigration detention. Despite having a track record of administering facilities with abusive conditions, these companies lobbied effectively for the recent surge. Private companies should not drive public policy, especially as it pertains to the imprisonment of human beings.

8. Unmask or Release: Any Arrest Made by a Masked ICE Agent is Unlawful

Masked ICE and CBP agents are routinely carrying out operations with their faces covered and refusing to identify themselves. Masked federal agents are unacceptable in a democratic society, both symbolically and because they prevent transparency and accountability. The majority of Americans disapprove of these agents wearing face coverings, which serve no practical purpose for lawful immigration enforcement.

The change: An arrest conducted by an ICE or CBP agent who conceals their face, fails to visibly identify their agency, or fails to display proper identification shall be unlawful.

Why it matters: Accountability requires identification. No more anonymous raids. We already demand that of our local police officers, and we should demand it of federal law enforcement agents, too.

9. End Harmful Hiring and Onboarding Protocols

Recently, a Slate journalist was offered an ICE agent position without providing any paperwork, drug test, or background check. New ICE officers now complete only about 42 days of training, a downgrade from the more rigorous training program, which lasted five months. Folks with prior law enforcement experience can even skip the abbreviated version and take online courses instead.

The change: Immediately pass legislation with the following requirements and prohibitions:

• Prohibit accelerated training programs

• Prohibit conditional or provisional appointments before completing all required background checks, hiring requirements, and training

• Ban hiring of individuals affiliated with hate groups

• Require all current officers to meet these standards retroactively

Why it matters: Rapid hiring with reduced standards has created a cohort of overwhelmed, underprepared officers more prone to escalation. Training should never be sacrificed.

10. Allow Civil Lawsuits Against Federal Law Enforcement

Victims of federal law enforcement abuse—including by ICE and CBP—have essentially no recourse. In 1971, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents established that people could sue federal officers for constitutional violations. But decades of court rulings have gutted this protection, and qualified immunity blocks 99% of cases before trial by shielding officers unless they violated a “clearly established” law. The result: federal agents operate with near-total civil impunity.

The change: Pass the Bivens Act (HR 6091) to create a federal statute allowing civilians to sue federal law enforcement for constitutional violations, and eliminate qualified immunity for federal officers. This strips away the legal shields that currently protect ICE and CBP agents from accountability.

Why it matters: Federal officers must face personal consequences for rights violations. Without accountability, abuse continues unchecked. The Bivens Act makes this right enforceable through statute rather than relying on weakened judicial precedent, while eliminating qualified immunity ensures that victims can actually reach court and receive justice.

---

State / Local

In the absence of federal action, local jurisdictions can implement safeguards to impede ICE and slow down the deportation machine.

A. Prohibit 287(g) Agreements

287(g) programs empower ICE to “deputize” state and local law enforcement officers as ICE agents, authorizing them to perform immigration officer functions under ICE’s oversight. Under these agreements, sheriffs can screen people in custody and flag them for immigration arrest. ICE can also utilize local jails (run by sheriffs) to detain undocumented people before transfer / deportation. In 2025, nearly half (about 48%) of ICE’s 1,000+ daily arrests occurred in local jails.

The change: Pass state laws prohibiting local law enforcement from joining 287(g) agreements. Note: Eight states (CA, CT, DE, IL, ME, NJ, OR, WA) have already prohibited 287(g) agreements.

Why it matters: Ending 287(g) agreements cuts a major arrest and detainment pipeline for ICE. Without these agreements, ICE loses its pre-screening arm inside local jails and can no longer automatically pull people into immigration custody simply for being arrested (without convictions).

States and counties that have prohibited 287(g) agreements have much lower rates of ICE arrests. At the same time, research shows that these jurisdictions do not experience higher crime rates, indicating that scaling back 287(g) does not undermine public safety. This combination of lower ICE arrests and stable crime levels supports the argument that communities can protect immigrant residents without sacrificing community safety.

B. Increase the Number of Sanctuary Cities and Strengthen City Response

Sanctuary city ordinances limit or prohibit the sharing of information / assistance between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement (ICE).

Contrary to a common misconception, sanctuary city laws do not prohibit federal law enforcement from operating in those cities. They only limit the level of assistance from the local governments.

The change: Similar to prohibiting 287(g) at the state level, local jurisdictions can explicitly ban the sharing of staffing, resources, or local government-owned facilities for ICE operations and detention.

Why it matters: Sanctuary city policies help ensure that minorities and undocumented people feel safe going to local police / law enforcement when in danger, to report crimes, etc., without fear of being passed along to immigration authorities. In doing so, they make cities safer.

These policies also ensure that local law enforcement focuses on local issues.

C. Disrupt ICE’s Purchasing, Leasing, and Usage of Detention Facilities

ICE is using a variety of mechanisms to establish immigration detention facilities around the country, often against the will of the people in those communities. States, counties, and cities have proposed and enacted laws to block these facilities. Although these laws have and will face legal challenges, they are an essential tool for disrupting inhumane ICE detention and overreach by federal immigration enforcement.

The change: Pass state legislation and city ordinances that block ICE from using local facilities for immigration detention using the following methods:

• Prohibit public entities from contracting for federal detention

• Prohibit local law enforcement from detaining people on behalf of ICE

• Establish a moratorium on approvals for permitting for detention facilities

• Enact steep financial penalties or tax rates on all entities that participate in immigration detention

Why it matters: States and local governments have a right to prevent federal immigration enforcement from exploiting their communities. Each local fight will take on a different shape and use different tactics, and will likely result in long legal battles. These fights are worth it. Local governments must stand up to overreach of ICE, CBP, and immigration enforcement more broadly.

---

What You Can Do

Contact your Congresspeople: Contact your representatives and demand they support these 10 policies. These changes can be enacted within 15 business days of a vote.

Contact your State Representatives: Push for laws prohibiting 287(g) agreements that deputize local police as ICE agents. Eight states (CA, CT, DE, IL, ME, NJ, OR, WA) have already done this.

Contact your Mayor or Town Council: Support sanctuary city policies that limit cooperation with ICE. Almost 400 jurisdictions already have such policies—yours can too.

Help your Community: Spread the word. Public conversation about these policy changes strengthens our position and moves the line.

Evaluate Other Policy Demands with Diligence: Use our 5A framework found toward the beginning of the roadmap to assess all other proposals relating to ICE.

Together, We Will Win

Even when ICE is abolished, the federal government may replace it with or reassign its work to other agencies. We acknowledge this likelihood. The work will continue.

But these 10 demands create immediate barriers to mass deportation, protect due process, and build the foundation for a rights-based immigration system.

Lives are at stake. This is our pathway to ending ICE.

#AbolishICE #10ToEndICE