The Prison Policy Initiative has released a new analysis arguing that cooperation between state and local law enforcement agencies and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) does not reduce immigration arrests in community settings.

The report, titled "Cooperation with ICE doesn't stop community arrests: New data on the results of state strategies," presents data comparing arrest outcomes across jurisdictions with different levels of federal-state cooperation.

What does the report examine?

The Prison Policy Initiative, a Massachusetts-based nonprofit research organization, focuses on criminal justice policy, including the intersection of immigration enforcement and local policing.

The report's central claim is that state strategies promoting ICE cooperation have not lowered arrest rates in the communities where cooperation agreements operate. Cooperation, the report argues, has not delivered the deterrent effect that policymakers anticipated.

Who is affected?

The findings concern several groups:

• State and local officials weighing whether to enter, expand, or terminate ICE cooperation agreements
• Immigrant communities whose members face arrest in workplaces, neighborhoods, and residences
• Local law enforcement agencies carrying out detainers and 287(g) functions
• Federal immigration authorities measuring whether state partnerships change ground-level outcomes

How does this fit the broader debate?

State-level cooperation with ICE has divided U.S. jurisdictions for more than two decades. The 287(g) program, launched in 1996, allows ICE to delegate certain immigration enforcement functions to state and local officers. Roughly 100 jurisdictions have participated in some form of the program at various points since its inception.

Opponents of cooperation agreements have argued that they damage trust between immigrant communities and local police, discouraging cooperation with reporting crimes. Proponents have argued that cooperation removes removable noncitizens from communities and reduces recidivism.

The Prison Policy Initiative's report enters that debate on the empirical side, asking whether the promised reduction in community arrests has materialized.

What questions remain?

The headline finding — that cooperation does not stop community arrests — leaves several questions open. The report does not appear to claim that cooperation is without effect; rather, it suggests the effect differs from what proponents promised.

Whether cooperation relocates arrests to different settings, accelerates them, or simply maintains prior levels is the kind of detail the underlying methodology would need to establish.

Readers seeking state-by-state breakdowns, arrest counts, and methodology details should consult the full Prison Policy Initiative report directly. Independent researchers and immigration policy desks will likely weigh in once the underlying dataset becomes available.

Where the analysis fits

For an immigration policy audience, the report lands inside a long-running argument over whether state-federal immigration partnerships improve public safety outcomes or simply redistribute enforcement activity. The Prison Policy Initiative's framing — "new data on the results of state strategies" — signals an attempt to test the claims empirically rather than ideologically.