DHS Says ICE Has Started a 'Surge' in Sanctuary Jurisdictions in 11 States and D.C.; No Officer Numbers Released
In a September 26 post on X, the Department of Homeland Security said immigration officers would target "criminal illegal aliens" in places that limit cooperation with federal agents. It also denied reports that ICE had paused arrests of people with no criminal record.
Two DHS Statements Issued the Same Weekend, Pointed in Different Directions
On Saturday, September 26, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security posted on X that Immigration and Customs Enforcement had begun a "nationwide public safety surge in sanctuary cities"[1][4]. In the same breath, DHS used the post to deny a different story: that ICE officers had just been told to stop arresting people with no criminal record[3][4].
Both statements came from the same agency, on the same day, about the same agents. One promised a bigger push. The other denied a smaller one had ever started. That's the whole story in miniature — DHS spent the weekend insisting it was doing more, not less.
The surge targets 11 states and Washington, D.C.: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington[1][2]. Some early write-ups rounded that to "12 states." It's actually 11 states plus the district — and DHS named no cities at all. Reports pointing to Chicago, New York or Portland are reporters' inferences from the state list, not DHS's own words[7][8].
The Report DHS Was Answering
The surge announcement didn't appear out of nowhere. It followed a Daily Wire story, citing unnamed ICE sources, that officers had been told over the weekend to stop arresting people without criminal charges or convictions[3]. That would have ended what's called a "collateral arrest" — picking up someone with no record simply because they were standing next to the person agents came for.
Those sources told the Daily Wire the order was meant to "calm things down before the elections," and that some officers were angry about it[3]. DHS called the report "false." A spokesperson said "no one is off the table" and that officers "will continue to arrest any and all illegal aliens that come into our path"[1][3][4].
So the surge wasn't really a new initiative dreamed up that weekend. It reads more like a public correction — DHS making sure nobody thought enforcement was easing up, five weeks before the November midterms[3][4].
Why Sanctuary Jurisdictions Produce More Street Arrests, Not Fewer
To understand why DHS picked these particular states, it helps to know how ICE normally operates. When someone gets booked into a local jail, ICE can ask that jail to hold the person an extra day or two so federal agents can pick them up before release. That's usually the easiest, lowest-risk way to make an arrest — inside a controlled facility, not out in a neighborhood.
Sanctuary jurisdictions limit or refuse those hold requests. DHS argues that means people it considers dangerous get released back into communities, and its own statement blames "sanctuary politicians" for that[1]. The agency says the result is that ICE then has to track people down at homes and workplaces instead — a process that takes more agents and carries more risk for everyone involved, including bystanders.
That's the structural piece under this fight. The federal government can send its own agents anywhere it wants. It can't force local police to do immigration enforcement for it. So when a state won't cooperate, DHS's only lever is to send more of its own people in — a "surge"[1][7].
A Promise With No Numbers Behind It
For all the attention, the public record here is thin. DHS has released no officer count, no budget and no end date for the surge[1][5]. Border czar Tom Homan, who separately said ICE would "surge resources and flood the zone" in sanctuary cities, gave none of those figures either[5][6]. Even the International Business Times, which largely repeated Homan's language, noted the absence[5].
That gap matters because it means nobody outside the agency can yet verify whether this is a real redeployment of personnel or mostly a message aimed at an election-season audience. The only way to know will be arrest data and on-the-ground reporting in the weeks ahead[1][5].
Local officials aren't waiting to find out. Portland Mayor Keith Wilson's office said the city "remains committed to its sanctuary-city policies" and won't use city resources to help federal immigration enforcement[7][8]. That's the predictable response from jurisdictions that have no legal obligation to cooperate and no intention of starting now.
Whose Arrest Numbers Are the Real Numbers
The core disagreement isn't really about whether ICE should arrest dangerous people — both sides say yes to that. It's about who actually gets swept up when agents go looking. DHS frames its targets as "criminal illegal aliens," including "murderers, rapists, child predators, and gang members"[1]. Critics, including local officials, point to reporting that most people ICE actually arrests have no conviction, or only a minor one[1].
Both things can be true at once: DHS can genuinely be targeting serious offenders in its stated rationale, while its own wording — arresting "any and all illegal aliens that come into our path" — commits it to arresting far more people than that category describes[1][4]. Advocates argue that line undercuts the "worst of the worst" framing even if DHS isn't being insincere about wanting those offenders[1][11].
Recent incidents have sharpened the argument on both sides. A U.S. citizen was injured in a Chicago suburb after agents reportedly mistook him for someone else[1][12]. In Austin, agents shot a Venezuelan delivery driver, Wilber Rafael Garcés Perez; federal prosecutors have since charged him with assaulting an officer, saying he struck an agent with his vehicle, while his attorney disputes that account[1][12].
How the Coverage Split Along Familiar Lines
Outlets covered this through strikingly different lenses. The Daily Wire and the Gateway Pundit framed the story around whether enforcement was going soft — "Total Confusion at ICE," as one headline put it — treating the reported stand-down as the real news and the surge as a correction[3][10]. Those outlets judge the story by whether enforcement looks tough enough; who actually gets arrested gets little attention.
Center-left and local outlets, including NewsNation, The Hill and Latin Times, set DHS's "murderers, rapists" language against the reporting on who's actually arrested, and led with the Chicago and Austin incidents[1][2][11]. Latin Times called Homan's remarks a "threat." Newsweek's headline led with DHS's own quote, letting the denial itself become the story[4].
Searches turned up almost no original coverage from outlets outside the U.S. — Al Jazeera, the BBC, Xinhua and the South China Morning Post all appeared absent. What did surface was mostly secondhand: Ukraine's UA.News simply republished The Hill, and the UK's IBTimes stood out mainly for noting what DHS hadn't said — no officer count, no timetable[5]. For now, this remains a story the rest of the world is watching from a distance, if it's watching at all.
Summary
On Saturday, September 26, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had "initiated a nationwide public safety surge in sanctuary cities"[1][4]. DHS said officers would target "criminal illegal aliens," including "murderers, rapists, child predators, and gang members," many of whom it said were "released from jails by sanctuary politicians"[1]. DHS listed 11 states and Washington, D.C.: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington[1][2]. Some early descriptions called this "12 states." It is 12 jurisdictions, one of which is D.C. DHS named states, not cities. Reports that point to Chicago, New York or Portland are inferences from that state list[7][8].
The announcement came inside a DHS denial. The Daily Wire had reported, citing unnamed ICE sources, that officers were told that weekend to stop arresting people with no criminal charges or convictions. That would have ended "collateral arrests" of people found alongside a target[3]. DHS called the report "false" and said "no one is off the table"[3][4]. DHS also said officers "will continue to arrest any and all illegal aliens that come into our path"[1]. Border czar Tom Homan separately said ICE would "surge resources and flood the zone" in sanctuary cities. He gave no figure, timetable or officer count[5][6].
The core dispute is over who this surge is really aimed at. The administration says sanctuary policies let dangerous people walk out of local jails, so ICE must go into communities to find them[1]. Critics, including local officials, point to reporting that most people ICE arrests have no criminal record or only minor offenses[1]. They also note that DHS's own words commit it to arresting anyone without legal status it meets[1]. Portland Mayor Keith Wilson's office said the city "remains committed to its sanctuary-city policies"[7].
The Event
On Saturday, September 26, 2026, DHS posted on X that ICE had begun a "nationwide public safety surge in sanctuary cities"[1][4]. A DHS spokesperson named 11 states and Washington, D.C., as the places where the push applies[1][2]. The statement answered a Daily Wire report that ICE officers had been told to stop arresting non-criminals. DHS called that report false[3][4]. DHS has not released officer numbers, a budget or an end date. Homan also gave none of these when he described the plan[5].
Undisputed Facts
- DHS announced the surge in a post on X on Saturday, September 26, 2026[1][4].
- The jurisdictions DHS named are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Washington, D.C., Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. That is 11 states plus the District of Columbia[1][2].
- DHS's statement said officers would target "criminal illegal aliens" and would also "continue to arrest any and all illegal aliens that come into our path"[1].
- The Daily Wire reported, citing unnamed ICE sources, that officers were told to stop arresting people without criminal convictions or charges. DHS called the report "false" and said "no one is off the table"[3][4].
- Tom Homan said ICE would "surge resources and flood the zone" in sanctuary cities. He did not give a number of officers or a timetable[5][6].
- Portland Mayor Keith Wilson's office said the city remains committed to its sanctuary policies and will not use city resources to help with federal immigration enforcement[7].
The Pressure
Strip away the moralizing and blame. What structural realities persist regardless of which narrative wins?
- Midterm politics
- The surge was announced about five weeks before the November 2026 midterms. Officers quoted by the Daily Wire said the reported stand-down was meant to 'calm things down before the elections.' The administration answered with a show of force the same weekend[3][4].
- The jail-handoff gap
- ICE's easiest arrests happen inside local jails. In sanctuary jurisdictions those handoffs are limited. So ICE has to make more arrests in the community, which takes more officers. DHS's own statement blames releases by 'sanctuary politicians' for this[1].
- Federal–local power limits
- The federal government can send its own agents anywhere. It cannot simply order local police to do immigration work. That is why the conflict plays out as federal 'surges' into jurisdictions that will not cooperate[1][7].
Material realityNo public plan exists yet. DHS named 11 states and D.C. It has not said how many officers, which cities, or for how long. Homan also gave no numbers[1][5]. Whether this is a real redeployment or mainly a message will only show up in later arrest data and in reports of what happens on the ground. DHS's own wording makes one thing clear: arrests are not limited to people with criminal records[1][4].
Narrative as a weaponDHS chose the frame 'public safety surge' against 'murderers, rapists, child predators.' It released that frame while denying a leak about a softer arrest policy[1][3]. The Daily Wire and outlets to its right shaped the first round of coverage as a fight inside the right over whether enforcement had gone soft[3][10]. Center and left outlets, along with local officials, recast it as an escalation aimed at Democratic jurisdictions. They highlighted incidents and the gap between DHS's rhetoric and who actually gets arrested[1][7][11]. Readers should note one more thing: the widely repeated '12 states' and the named cities (Chicago, New York, Portland) are not in the DHS statement as reported. DHS named 11 states and D.C., and it did not name cities[1][2][7].
How Each Side Sees It
Each major actor’s view — how it frames things, its underlying incentive, and how it’s materially affected. Tap a side to read it.
Frames it asThe administration's case rests on how jails and ICE work together. When a local jail books someone, ICE can ask the jail to hold that person for pickup. Sanctuary jurisdictions often refuse those requests. So, DHS argues, people ICE considers dangerous are "released from jails by sanctuary politicians" back into neighborhoods[1]. Officers then have to find them at homes and workplaces. DHS says that is slower and riskier for everyone than a handoff inside a jail. The administration also argues that federal immigration law applies everywhere, and that "anyone in our country illegally will be arrested and deported"[3][4].
WhyTo show voters, and its own officers, that enforcement is not easing before the November midterms. The Daily Wire's sources described the reported stand-down as an effort to "calm things down before the elections," and some officers were angry about it[3]. The surge announcement countered that story the same day[3][4].
Impact on themICE gets political cover to move resources into Democratic-run jurisdictions. It also risks more high-profile confrontations. Recent incidents in a Chicago suburb and in Austin are already drawing scrutiny[1][12]. In the Austin case, federal prosecutors have since charged the driver who was shot with assaulting an officer, saying he struck an agent with his vehicle; his attorney disputes that account.
Frames it asThese officials argue that local police depend on immigrant residents reporting crimes and acting as witnesses. If police are seen as an arm of ICE, those residents stop calling. They also argue that immigration enforcement is a federal job, and that the Constitution does not let Washington force local governments to carry it out with local money and staff. Portland's office said city resources will not be used to assist federal immigration enforcement[7][8].
WhyTo protect local control over policing and keep immigrant communities cooperating with local police. Many are also responding to Democratic voters who oppose ICE tactics[7][8].
Impact on themThese jurisdictions face more federal agents on their streets, possible protests and clashes, and legal fights. They also face uncertainty: DHS has not said where or when agents will arrive[5][8].
Frames it asThey argue that a law that is not enforced is not really law. In their view, limiting arrests to people with criminal records amounts to a quiet amnesty for everyone else who is here illegally. ICE sources told the Daily Wire they wanted Trump to "put an end" to the reported stand-down[3][10].
WhyTo keep collateral arrests and broad enforcement in place, and to block any easing of enforcement for political reasons[3][10].
Impact on themThey won a public promise from DHS that "no one is off the table"[4]. Officers still face mixed messages about their guidance[10].
Frames it asAdvocates point to reporting that most people ICE arrests are not violent offenders[1]. They also point to incidents in which U.S. citizens and workers were hurt. One was a U.S. citizen left injured in a Chicago suburb after agents reportedly mistook him for a fugitive. Another was a shooting of a Venezuelan delivery driver, Wilber Rafael Garcés Perez, in Austin; federal officers say he tried to strike an agent with his car and have charged him with assault, while his attorney disputes that account[1][12]. To advocates, DHS's own line about arresting "any and all" undocumented people it meets shows the 'worst of the worst' framing is a cover story[1][11].
WhyTo limit arrests of long-settled people who have no criminal record, and to put pressure on the administration through public opinion and the courts[11].
Impact on themUndocumented residents in the named states face a higher risk of arrest and detention. Mixed-status families face uncertainty about their future[11].
Like this article?
The Bias Ledger average rating 4.4
The same story, as framed by outlets across the spectrum, ordered least to most biased. The bias score (1 = straight, 10 = heavily spun) is an AI assessment of that framing — click an outlet to see its track record. The tell is the word choice or omission that reveals the angle.
| Outlet | Vantage | Bias | How they frame it | The tell |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Hill | U.S. center | 3 | ICE ramps up presence in sanctuary cities during nationwide surge | It attributes the story to DHS and puts "sanctuary cities" in quotes. It mostly passes DHS's framing along without testing it against arrest data. |
| Newsweek | U.S. center | 3 | DHS Denies Change Of ICE Strategy: 'No One Is Off The Table' | The headline leads with the denial and DHS's quote, so the government's statement becomes the news. There is little independent framing. |
| International Business Times | UK-based, commercial, center | 3 | Tom Homan States ICE Will Flood Sanctuary Cities With Resources and Declares They Are Not Going Anywhere | The headline repeats Homan's rhetoric. The body adds a skeptical note that he gave no figure, timetable or officer count. |
| NewsNation | U.S. center | 4 | DHS announces nationwide surge in 'sanctuary' cities | The headline is neutral. The body sets DHS's 'murderers, rapists' language against the line that 'the vast majority of people arrested were non-criminal,' with no specific data source given. It also adds the Chicago-suburb incident. |
| Latin Times | U.S. Latino-audience, left-leaning | 5 | Homan Says ICE 'Isn't Going Anywhere': What His Threat Means for 5 Immigrant Hubs | It calls Homan's remarks a 'threat' and frames the story around immigrant communities bracing for impact. |
| The Daily Wire | U.S. right | 6 | EXCLUSIVE: ICE Officers Say They Were Told To Stop Arresting Non-Criminals | It relies on unnamed officers' accounts, including the claim that the order was about 'the elections.' The story is framed around whether enforcement is going soft, not around who gets arrested — a framing choice as loaded as Latin Times' 'threat' framing on the other side. |
| The Gateway Pundit | U.S. hard right | 7 | Total Confusion at ICE: Agents Told Overnight to Stop Arresting 'Non-Criminal' Illegal Aliens — DHS Insists No Policy Change | Words like 'Total chaos' and 'overnight' cast the story as internal sabotage of tough enforcement. The pressure it applies comes from the right: the worry is that enforcement is too lenient. |
References
- DHS announces nationwide surge in 'sanctuary' cities — NewsNation · Owned by Nexstar Media Group; markets itself as centrist
- ICE ramps up presence in sanctuary cities during nationwide surge — The Hill · Owned by Nexstar; Washington-focused, center
- EXCLUSIVE: ICE Officers Say They Were Told To Stop Arresting Non-Criminals — The Daily Wire · Conservative digital media company
- DHS Denies Change Of ICE Strategy: 'No One Is Off The Table' — Newsweek · Privately owned newsmagazine, center
- Tom Homan States ICE Will Flood Sanctuary Cities With Resources and Declares They Are Not Going Anywhere — International Business Times · UK-based commercial digital outlet, center
- Homan: ICE isn't 'going anywhere' amid immigration enforcement scrutiny — The Hill · Owned by Nexstar; Washington-focused, center
- ICE initiates immigration enforcement surge in sanctuary cities. Could Portland be among its targets? — Yahoo News (syndicated; originating outlet not confirmed) · Aggregator carrying local Oregon reporting
- ICE announces sanctuary city surge, leaving Oregon to wonder what comes next — Central Oregon Daily · Local broadcast news (Bend, Oregon), commercial
- Why DHS quickly reversed course on who ICE is targeting for arrests — NewsNation · Owned by Nexstar Media Group; markets itself as centrist
- Total Confusion at ICE: Agents Told Overnight to Stop Arresting 'Non-Criminal' Illegal Aliens — DHS Insists No Policy Change — The Gateway Pundit · Pro-Trump hard-right website
- Homan Says ICE 'Isn't Going Anywhere': What His Threat Means for 5 Immigrant Hubs — Latin Times · Latino-audience digital outlet (IBT Media), left-leaning on immigration
- Sanctuary Cities Targeted in New Nationwide ICE Immigration Crackdown: 'No One Is Off the Table' — Yahoo News (syndicated; originating outlet not confirmed) · Aggregator; originating outlet's orientation unknown