Methodology & Data Sources
Transparency about how we collect, process, and present ICE accountability data.
Data Sources
Court Listener
Federal court opinions, dockets, and RECAP documents related to ICE litigation.
Data Types
USASpending.gov
Official source for federal spending data, including ICE contractor payments.
Data Types
Federal Register
Official journal of the federal government with DHS and ICE regulatory documents.
Data Types
Understanding Our Badges & Ratings
We use several badges and scores throughout the site to help you quickly assess information. Here's what each one means:
Credibility Score (1-10)
AI-assessed score based on multiple factors about a news source and article.
Factors: Source reputation, citation quality, factual accuracy history, transparency, corrections policy, funding model
Bias Assessment
Political lean detected in the article's framing and word choice.
Sentiment
Overall emotional tone of the article toward immigrants/immigration.
Severity Levels
Used for bot activity alerts and influence campaign tracking.
Evidence Strength
How well-documented a claim or connection is.
Verification Status
For Leaked Documents and primary sources.
Understanding "White Nationalist" Classification
When we describe a source or individual as "white nationalist," we are using a specific, documented classification - not a political insult. Here's what this term means and why it matters:
Definition
White nationalism is an ideology that advocates for a racially-defined national identity, typically promoting the interests of white people over others and often seeking to limit immigration from non-white countries. It differs from general conservatism or immigration restrictionism in that it explicitly frames policy in racial terms.
How We Determine This Classification
- •Self-identification: The source explicitly identifies with white nationalist ideology
- •SPLC/ADL designation: Classified by Southern Poverty Law Center or Anti-Defamation League based on documented statements and activities
- •Primary source evidence: Direct quotes, leaked communications, or published writings that explicitly promote racial hierarchy
- •Organizational ties: Documented funding from or leadership of designated hate groups
Why This Matters for Manipulation
Understanding the origins of arguments helps identify manipulation tactics:
- →Hidden motivations: Organizations may present economic or security arguments publicly while internal documents reveal racial motivations
- →Laundered talking points: Ideas that explicitly call for racial hierarchy get repackaged in neutral-sounding language
What makes them problematic? These ideas are problematic because they are not based on substantial fact - they rely on subversive manipulation rather than evidence. As shown above, the actual data contradicts the claims (immigrants assimilate, pay taxes, commit fewer crimes). When arguments require hiding their true basis and disguising racial motivations as "economic concerns," that deception itself reveals the lack of factual foundation.
Example: "Immigrants are invading" originated in manifestos calling for violence against non-white people. When a cable news host says "invasion," they're using language designed to dehumanize - even if they don't endorse the original violence. The word choice isn't based on data (legal crossings, asylum claims) but on emotional manipulation.
Evidence: The Leaked Documents section shows internal memos where organizations use racial language privately while publishing "economic" arguments publicly. If the economic arguments were factually sound, why hide the real motivation?
Conclusion: We identify these ideas as problematic not as a political label, but because they fail the basic test of honest argument: they cannot be defended on their actual merits, so they must be laundered through deception.
- →Conspiracy origins: Many immigration "concerns" (Great Replacement, invasion rhetoric) originated in white nationalist circles before entering mainstream discourse
Understanding Cultural Preservation Concerns
Some people genuinely worry about preserving cultural traditions, shared values, and community cohesion - concerns that deserve respectful engagement, not dismissal. Let's examine this perspective honestly:
The Concern (Stated Genuinely)
"I value the culture I grew up in - the language, traditions, shared history. Rapid demographic change feels like losing something important. I want my grandchildren to inherit what I inherited."
What the Evidence Shows
- • Assimilation is real: By the third generation, 97% of immigrants' descendants speak English as their primary language (Census Bureau)
- • Culture evolves naturally: American culture in 1924, 1964, and 2024 are all distinctly "American" despite massive changes. Irish, Italian, and Jewish immigrants were once seen as threats to "American culture"
- • Contribution, not replacement: Immigrants adopt American values while adding to the cultural mix - this is how American culture has always worked
- • Economic integration: Second-generation immigrants have higher rates of homeownership and civic participation than their parents
Where It Goes Wrong
The concern becomes problematic when it shifts from "I want to preserve traditions" to "policy should be based on racial categories." Culture is not genetic - anyone can learn a language, adopt traditions, and participate in civic life. When preservation arguments require excluding people by ancestry rather than behavior, they've crossed into racial policy.
The Manipulation
Political operatives exploit genuine cultural concerns by conflating "culture" with "race." The leaked Tanton memos explicitly discuss using "cultural" language to make racial arguments palatable. When someone says "Western civilization," ask: do they mean values anyone can adopt, or ancestry you're born with?
Important Distinction
Not everyone who opposes immigration is a white nationalist. Many people have legitimate concerns about immigration policy based on economics, rule of law, or cultural continuity. We use the "white nationalist" classification only when there is documented evidence of explicitly racial ideology - not simply because someone holds restrictionist views or worries about cultural change.
Important Notes About AI Analysis
- AI assessments are starting points for evaluation, not final verdicts. Always verify important claims yourself.
- Credibility scores reflect the source and article, not whether you should agree with the conclusions.
- Bias detection identifies framing choices, not whether the content is true or false.
- A high-credibility source can still publish biased content, and a biased source can still report facts accurately.
Data Collection Process
Automated Collection
- Daily automated sync from all data sources via scheduled functions
- Deduplication logic prevents double-counting of records
- API authentication ensures access to complete datasets
- Data stored in PostgreSQL database with row-level security
Data Processing
- Settlement amounts extracted from court records and news sources
- Contractor payments filtered by ICE as awarding agency
- Court cases filtered by immigration-related keywords
- All monetary values stored in USD without adjustment for inflation
Limitations & Caveats
- Settlement amounts may be underreported as many settlements are confidential
- Court case data depends on what is publicly available in federal court records
- Contractor data only includes awards above reporting thresholds
- Historical data may be incomplete for years prior to 2015
- Some data may have a delay of 24-48 hours from source updates
How to Cite This Data
If you use data from ICE Audit in your research, journalism, or other work, please cite us using one of the following formats:
ICE Audit. (2026). ICE spending and accountability data [Data set]. Retrieved from https://iceaudit.com/dataICE Audit. "ICE Spending and Accountability Data." ICE Audit, 2026, iceaudit.com/data.ICE Audit. "ICE Spending and Accountability Data." Accessed [date]. https://iceaudit.com/data.Data Ethics
ICE Audit is committed to responsible data practices:
- No personal dossiers: We do not compile or publish personal information about individuals.
- Public data only: All data comes from publicly available government sources.
- Transparency: Our methodology is fully documented and our data is exportable.
- No surveillance: We do not track or surveil any individuals or groups.
Have questions about our data or methodology?
Explore the Data →