ICE's Ankle Monitoring Expansion Sparks Privacy Worries

Published Date : 7/28/2025 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has significantly expanded its use of GPS ankle monitors for adult immigrants, sparking concerns among privacy advocates and immigrant rights groups. This article explores the implications of this new policy and its impact on the immigrant community. 

In a quiet but consequential shift in immigration enforcement strategy, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has launched a sweeping expansion of its electronic surveillance program, ordering field agents to place most adult immigrants in the agency’s Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program under GPS ankle monitoring.

The move marks a significant escalation in the scope of biometric tracking, raising alarms among immigrant rights advocates, privacy experts, and even some former ICE officials who warn that the agency is trading case-by-case discretion for sweeping digital control.

The directive, issued in an internal memo dated June 9, outlines new policy guidance that mandates the use of ankle monitors “whenever possible” for all adult immigrants enrolled in ATD. The memo, according to the Washington Post, quotes ICE Acting Assistant Director Dawnisha M. Helland, saying, “If the alien is not being arrested at the time of reporting, escalate their supervision level to GPS ankle monitors whenever possible and increase reporting requirements.”

Previously, ICE used a tiered system involving in-person check-ins, voice recognition phone calls, or SmartLINK, which is a mobile application that uses facial recognition and geolocation technology. The app, which costs $4 per migrant per day, had been viewed as a cost-effective alternative to detention, which costs roughly $150 per migrant per day. Ankle monitors, which had been reserved for high-risk cases or individuals with a history of noncompliance, are now poised to become the default.

The expansion affects a massive population. As of mid-2025, ICE supervises more than 183,000 individuals through ATD. Of that figure, only about 24,000 – roughly 13 percent – are currently outfitted with ankle monitors. The agency’s new directive suggests a radical increase in this number, with early implementation already underway in field offices across the southern United States. Pregnant women are exempted from ankle monitoring but will be issued wrist-worn tracking devices instead.

At the heart of this expansion is a powerful but controversial private contractor, BI, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the GEO Group, one of the largest private prison and detention corporations in the country. BI, Inc. operates ICE’s Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP), the infrastructure underpinning ATD. Since 2004, the company has maintained a virtual monopoly on ICE’s surveillance tools, including the supply of GPS ankle monitors, biometric facial recognition apps, and phone check-in systems. Under a five-year, $2.2 billion contract signed in 2020, BI is tasked with not only providing monitoring equipment but also managing supervision, case management, and data collection for hundreds of thousands of non-detained immigrants.

Complicating the picture, numerous former ICE officials have recently joined GEO in senior roles, a practice that has raised ethical concerns. One widely covered example is Tom Homan, the former acting director of ICE under Trump who today serves as Trump’s “border czar.” Ethics disclosures show that GEO (through a subsidiary called Geo Care) paid Homan over $5,000 in consulting fees during the two years before he joined the administration, a relationship critics say may have influenced his aggressive drive to expand detention bed capacity from approximately 41,500 in 2024 to a target of 100,000 beds, many of them under GEO contracts worth an estimated $130 million annually.

Equally striking is the case of Troy Beyer Bible, who left ICE at the end of October 2024 and was shortly thereafter named GEO’s executive vice president. Bible had previously overseen ICE’s San Antonio field office and managed operations at multiple detention sites. After his departure, GEO announced a $70 million investment to build its capacity to service ICE. The Project on Government Oversight reported that Bible even accepted reimbursement for travel expenses tied to GEO employment discussions while still employed at ICE, prompting questions about the propriety of his transition and whether internal intelligence or influence was exchanged.

With ICE’s demand for surveillance growing rapidly, BI and GEO Group executives have already taken steps to scale up operations. In a February earnings call, GEO’s leadership announced plans to invest over $16 million in expanding hardware capacity, training staff, and increasing the volume of GPS units available to ICE. The company also confirmed its internal projections to double or even triple the number of people monitored under ISAP in the coming year, potentially surveilling up to 450,000 immigrants or more by 2026.

But as the federal government embraces a model of mass electronic monitoring, critics argue that the policy not only lacks transparency, it also threatens to normalize a form of digital incarceration. Civil liberties advocates describe the program as a “digital prison” that applies punitive and stigmatizing measures to individuals who have not been charged with or convicted of any crime. These concerns are especially acute in the context of ankle monitors, which critics say are intrusive, malfunction-prone, and physically harmful.

Numerous individuals monitored through ATD have reported that their ankle monitors overheat, cause skin irritation, or deliver electric shocks. Others describe the psychological burden of wearing the device in public at work, school, or while caring for children where the bulky hardware acts as a visible mark of criminalization. Complaints of social isolation, anxiety, and depression are not uncommon, especially among those whose only violation is entering the country without documentation or seeking asylum.

ICE officials, however, maintain that ankle monitors are a necessary tool to ensure compliance. According to the agency, the failure-to-appear rate for immigrants with final removal orders hovers around 51 percent, though those figures are widely contested. ICE argues that GPS tracking provides an added layer of enforcement for individuals who might otherwise abscond or fail to attend immigration court hearings, and has framed the move as a cost-effective enforcement tool that promotes compliance with court hearings and case management check-ins.

ICE’s rationale echoes political calls for “border security” and “internal enforcement,” particularly under the Trump administration, which has placed renewed emphasis on toughening surveillance and detainment policies across the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Yet critics point out that ICE already has extensive tools at its disposal, including SmartLINK, the mobile app that uses biometric facial recognition and geolocation services to track and verify immigrant check-ins. ICE data shows that 84 percent of ATD participants currently use SmartLINK, which allows them to comply with agency requirements without the need for physical ankle monitors.

The app has raised its own set of privacy concerns, including the collection of facial data, movement history, and metadata that could potentially be shared across agencies or with private vendors. For many immigrants, it is a less invasive alternative to physical tracking hardware. Privacy experts have voiced serious alarms about the lack of oversight and accountability in how ICE and its contractors manage biometric and geolocation data. There is currently no statutory framework governing how long ICE can retain facial images, GPS tracking logs, or voiceprint data collected through ATD. Nor is there clarity on whether this information can be shared with law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or other government entities.

DHS has not issued updated Privacy Impact Assessments for the most recent expansion of ankle monitoring, and BI, Inc. is not subject to federal transparency laws like the Freedom of Information Act. Moreover, BI’s central position in the ATD ecosystem creates a troubling dynamic where one for-profit company controls the data, equipment, and case management functions for a massive, vulnerable population. This arrangement makes it exceedingly difficult for immigrants or advocates to challenge decisions, correct errors, or obtain information about how their personal data is being used.

Lawsuits filed by civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Just Futures Law, have challenged the program’s opacity and the potential for data misuse or overreach. While BI and ICE claim that safeguards are in place to protect personal information, independent audits are rare, and the public has little access to technical specifications or security protocols for the devices.

In October 2023, a DHS Inspector General management alert warned about serious security deficiencies in ICE’s SmartLINK mobile application and broader oversight of mobile devices. It said SmartLINK lacked basic safeguards against data breaches and raised concerns about ICE’s inability to ensure data minimization. Those findings have done little to halt the rapid deployment of these technologies.

In some cases, digital monitoring extends beyond location tracking. The SmartLINK app has been found to access contacts, camera permissions, and other sensitive phone data on users’ devices, raising the specter of mission creep and surveillance spillover into unrelated areas of immigrants’ lives. The lack of meaningful consent, paired with threats of re-detention or removal for failure to comply, undermines any claims that participation is voluntary or subject to meaningful review.

Despite these issues, ICE’s trajectory seems set. Internal procurement documents suggest the agency is now considering diversifying its vendor pool to support the expanded hardware demand. While BI remains the only approved provider of GPS monitors under the current ISAP contract, ICE has begun soliciting information from other firms capable of supplying tracking devices at scale. Some immigration attorneys fear that this move signals the emergence of a biometric surveillance marketplace in which companies will compete to offer the most expansive, intrusive tools, and turning immigrants into test cases for profitable monitoring technologies.

The rollout of ICE’s June directive has caused advocacy organizations to begin documenting the policy’s impact, submitting Freedom of Information Act requests, and pressing members of Congress to investigate the scope, legality, and ethics of the expanded surveillance regime. Thus far, no congressional hearing has been scheduled to review ICE’s use of biometric surveillance under ISAP, and the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS has not issued any public statement on the matter. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS): 

Q: What is the Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program?

A: The ATD program is an initiative by ICE that uses various forms of surveillance, including GPS ankle monitors, to track and manage immigrants who are not in detention. It aims to ensure compliance with immigration court hearings and other legal requirements.

Q: Why is ICE expanding the use of GPS ankle monitors?

A: ICE is expanding the use of GPS ankle monitors to enhance its ability to track and manage immigrants, ensuring they comply with immigration court hearings and other legal requirements. The agency argues that this is a cost-effective and necessary enforcement tool.

Q: What are the main concerns raised by privacy advocates?

A: Privacy advocates are concerned that the expanded use of GPS ankle monitors is intrusive, malfunction-prone, and physically harmful. They also argue that it normalizes a form of digital incarceration and raises serious privacy and ethical issues.

Q: Who is BI, Inc., and what is their role in this program?

A: BI, Inc. is a subsidiary of the GEO Group and operates ICE’s Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP). They provide monitoring equipment and manage supervision, case management, and data collection for the ATD program.

Q: What is the potential impact of this expansion on immigrants?

A: The expansion of GPS ankle monitors could lead to increased social isolation, anxiety, and depression among immigrants. It may also have physical side effects and stigmatize individuals who have not been charged with or convicted of any crime. 

More Related Topics :