In Benton County, Arkansas, the 287(g)-enabled program has led to more than 450 arrests linked to ICE from January through mid-October, averaging about 1.5 arrests per day in a county of roughly 300,000 residents.

The Benton County effort accounts for over 4% of similar nationwide arrests during the same period, with detainees suspected of immigration violations often held without bond and transferred to ICE custody after initial detentions, sometimes moving from the Washington County Detention Center to facilities in Louisiana for deportation.

The 287(g) framework allows local deputies to question inmates about immigration status and refer those suspected of illegal entry to ICE, contributing to about 4% of comparable nationwide arrests in the period examined.

Advocates and lawyers warn of broader consequences, including family separations, fear-driven behavior, and delays in obtaining or renewing permanent residency amid the crackdown.

The program’s impact extends to individual families, such as Edwin Sanchez-Mendoza, whose deportation after ICE holds and a separate criminal case worsened financial instability and housing security for Osornio family.

Concerns about due process arise as many cases are dismissed or charges dropped before conviction to enable deportation.

Immigrant communities report fear of racial profiling and restricted movement, with stories like Cristina Osornio, a legal permanent resident, detained on an ICE hold for days after a minor traffic stop.

Testimonies describe how misdemeanor arrests can lead to detention and potential deportations, prompting altered behavior and increased anxiety among immigrants.

Residents note a chilling effect, reducing daily activities and mobility in northwest Arkansas due to the ICE partnership.

Arrests under the program encompass a range of offenses, from forgery and drug trafficking to sexual assault, with some holds preceding convictions or sentencing.

Local agencies and officials have faced scrutiny over roles in the ICE partnership, with some deferring to ICE and advocates alleging profiling and coercive enforcement during stops and bookings.

Analysts view these policies as producing significant social and human consequences, including detentions and family separations, and they raise questions about the future direction of local-federal immigration enforcement.