You’ve Been Arrested by ICE — What Happens Next?

A total of 6,307 individuals were apprehended by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Michigan from the start of 2025 through early August 2026. But once taken into custody, what exactly happens to them is harder to follow.

Based on a Michigan Advance analysis of government data provided by ICE in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, processed by the Deportation Data Project and spanning data between January 2025 and early August 2026, people apprehended in Michigan were detained by ICE on average for 47 days — although that includes some who still remain in ICE custody.

About three-fourths of people who were arrested in Michigan by ICE ended up being deported or removed in some way, including around 20% of people who opted for “voluntary departure” from the U.S., a program promoted under the Trump administration to urge people to leave prior to a judge’s decision or a removal order. Another 23% of cases remain active — only a small proportion of those in detention, less than 1%, had any relief granted.

Ruby Robinson, a senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, told the Advance that, since January of 2025, the default action by federal officers coming into contact with anyone currently without legal status has been that person’s detention.

“Almost everybody who is placed in proceedings through an encounter or an action with ICE or CBP [Customs and Border Protection] is going to be detained,” he said.

For most people, that time in detention, between their initial arrest and a judge’s decision or removal order, is difficult to manage, Robinson said. And for many, the situation is made more difficult due to a common practice of transferring detainees between facilities. Most detainees are transferred less than three times during their time in ICE detention. 

Those transfers — often hundreds or thousands of miles across state lines — can take a real toll on detainees. Robinson also explained that being moved from one facility to another, often with essentially no notice, can complicate the day-to-day lives of detainees. 

“Maybe in one place there are people who spoke your language. Maybe there aren’t as many people, or no one, in the new place who speaks your language,” he said. “Learning the new rules, the system, the ways to get assistance — if you had money in one commissary account, trying to get it into a new account so you can make a phone call.”

Robinson also noted that only some facilities allow for in-person visits by relatives and others, and the farther someone is detained from home, the harder it is for their loved ones to visit.  

“The lack of in-person visiting affects the mood. It affects how people are feeling about their claims, whether they should continue to pursue them or not,” he said. “This is part of the psychology of detention and isolation. I’m certainly no psychologist, but the more removed you are from family and friends and community, the more depressed and anxious you may get about your claim.”

Joseph Williams, an immigration attorney who works with clients detained at the North Lake Processing Center in Baldwin, Michigan, also explained how it can disrupt legal proceedings when one of his clients is transferred out of state. 

“Personally, I like to go see my clients in person, so I’m not going to be able to do that if they’re taken to Louisiana,” he said. “They don’t communicate those changes to the attorneys. They will just up and pick somebody up and take them away from where they are familiar with, where they have access to their lawyer.”

In habeas corpus cases, he continued, the jurisdiction for the case also becomes complicated if a person is transferred. He told the story of one of his clients who was initially detained in Texas, was moved to Michigan, and then sent back to Texas, leaving him in legal limbo as to which judge should consider his case.

Where are people deported to?

For those who are deported, most are sent back to their country of citizenship. Of the 4,779 people apprehended in Michigan with a departure country listed in the data, less than 4% were sent to a country that was not their country of citizenship.  

Deporting an individual back to their country of citizenship comes with huge challenges for that person. Many left their homes due to safety concerns, and many had established lives and families in the United States. But for those who are sent somewhere else, a practice known as third-country deportations, other challenges arise — including not speaking the language of the country where they are sent and not having any community or support in that country. 

Williams told the story of one of his clients, a Chaldean man who, after talking to Michigan Democratic Reps. Hillary Scholten and Haley Stevens during their visit to the North Lake facility, was swiftly deported to Iraq, where he is now in hiding. He does not speak Arabic, nor does he have any family in Iraq. 

“I have not seen a lot of direct third-country removals from Michigan, but when they are happening for people who are from Michigan, they’re being staged in Texas or Louisiana, and then ultimately deported from there,” Robinson said.

Where are people detained, and where are they transferred? 

Over 98% of people apprehended by ICE in Michigan are first detained in Michigan — about half at the North Lake detention center and about half in county jails and ICE hold rooms across the state. 

And for most of those people, their longest detention stint — the term for a person’s time at any given detention facility — is still in Michigan. Around two-thirds of people apprehended by ICE in Michigan spend the majority of their time in detention at the North Lake facility. About 23% more spend the most time in one of the four county detention facilities in Michigan that function as ICE detention facilities — in Calhoun County, Chippewa County, Monroe County and St. Clair County. 

However, only about a third of people have their last reported detention site in Michigan. For those still detained by ICE as of early August, this data represents their most recent location at that time. For those who have already been deported, it represents their last location in ICE detention. 

“What we are seeing a lot of is when people are moved, people who are living or were caught in Michigan and detained here, the majority of them are actually remaining here in Michigan for their proceedings if they’re eligible to participate in removal proceedings,” Robinson said. “It’s only after they have been ordered removed, or they withdraw their applications, in which they’re being then staged for removal in places like Texas and Louisiana.”

Over half of people detained in Michigan’s last detention location was in Louisiana, Texas or Arizona, all states with facilities that can function as a “deportation hub,” notably including the Alexandria Staging Facility in Louisiana.

Williams said that a client being put on a short-notice flight to Louisiana is “usually the kiss of death” and a sign that they’ll be deported shortly.

“But sometimes it’s not. At this point, it’s kind of like a 50-50,” he said. “As they’re going to Louisiana, they’re either on a plane out or they’re gonna cycle through Texas and Arizona for about a month and then end up back at North Lake.”

As for why people are transferred when and where they end up, Williams said, “I’ve been trying to find some kind of logic with it.”

Transfers to detention facilities in different states can also give the government more power to avoid offering a detainee a bond hearing.

In Michigan, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Lopez-Campos v. Raycraft that noncitizens challenging their detention “were due individualized bond hearings in light of the significant time they have spent within the interior of the United States.” But other federal appellate courts — including the 5th Circuit Court, which covers both Texas and Louisiana — have issued decisions that would prevent someone from having a bond hearing.

Robinson said that he has not personally seen a dramatic pattern or trend of this type of venue shopping, a practice of pursuing a legal claim in a more favorable court, but said he does worry about that pattern.

But Williams said he has seen it happen, and said that it can make all the difference for a detainee in the possibility of being granted bond.

“It’s one-way venue shopping that the government’s just able to do, and it just adds so much complexity to our ability to argue and advocate for our clients,” Williams said. “It makes a huge difference where they put them, and it’s very one-sided. Theoretically, this is supposed to be us versus the Department of Homeland Security, but Homeland Security can just do whatever the f— they want.”