A verifiable public record of U.S. immigration
enforcement, built by all of us and open to everyone - incidents,
agents, deaths, vehicles, and facilities, documented with sources.
A verifiable public record of U.S. immigration
enforcement, built by all of us and open to everyone - incidents,
agents, deaths, vehicles, and facilities, documented with sources.
Swipe
documented incidents and unidentified agents that still need footage or
an ID, and drop an anonymous tip. Anonymous, reviewed before anything
appears, installs to your phone.
The ICE List Wiki is a public, verifiable record of immigration enforcement activity in the United States.
It documents incidents, agencies, individuals, facilities, vehicles, and legal authorities involved in enforcement operations.
Entries are structured, sourced, and timestamped to support verification, cross-referencing, and long-term analysis.
The wiki is intended for use by journalists, researchers, advocates, and the general public.
Project status: This wiki is
in active development. Structure, navigation, and data standards are
being finalised. Older pages may be reformatted as standards are applied
consistently.
Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, a 26-year-old man originally from
Colombia, was shot and killed on the morning of 13 July 2026 during a
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation in Biddeford, Maine.
Senator Angus King said Guerrero was not the operation's target; his
wife and young daughter were at the scene, and the agents wore no body
cameras. It is at least the 11th fatal shooting involving ICE or Border
Patrol agents this administration; the FBI is expected to investigate.
Most wanted
Most Wanted - unidentified agents
Federal agents recorded using force against the public who remain unidentified. Recognize someone? Submit a tip on their entry - your identity is not recorded.
No one in immigration court has the right to a public defender.
Detained adults and children often face deportation alone. The Florence
Project provides representation, Know Your Rights education, and family
support at no cost.
A community-curated library of films, documentaries, music and books
about immigration, detention and the fight for immigrant justice - kept
separate from the documented record.
The ICE List Wiki is designed for public use.
Journalists, researchers, and advocacy groups use the data to track
enforcement patterns, identify repeat agencies or jurisdictions, and
contextualise individual incidents.
Pages may be cited with attribution.
Coverage
ICE List in the media
The ICE List has been reported on and analysed by independent news
organisations, and indexed by academic and civic-tech projects. Read
some of that coverage here.
The .onion link requires Tor Browser. For maximum anonymity, use Tor and avoid submitting from a work device or network.
Verification and sourcing
Each page includes a verification status indicating whether claims
are supported by public records, media, video evidence, or other
documentation.
Unverified information is clearly labelled and is not presented as
established fact.
Pages may be updated as additional sources become available.
Navigate
Quick links
How to report an incident
Step-by-step instructions for submitting an incident with enough detail to verify and map it.
Deportation agents
Overview of ICE ERO officers, how we document them, and how to read agent pages.
By state
State directory
Browse state-specific portals documenting facilities, incidents, agents, and 287(g) agreements.
Submissions should be factual, specific, and supported by evidence where possible.
Speculation, harassment, or unverifiable claims are not published.
Contributors are encouraged to prioritise accuracy over speed.
The
United States, Iran and Oman appear to be edging closer to an interim
agreement that could reopen the Strait of Hormuz, raising hopes of
easing a crisis in one of the most dangerous flashpoints in the Middle East.
The proposed agreement, which has been under negotiation for several weeks, is intended to restore the June 17 ceasefire
between Washington and Tehran; resolve disputes over shipping through
the strategic waterway, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil
supplies had been shipped in peacetime; and create space for broader
negotiations on Iran’s nuclear programme and other issues.
US
President Donald Trump struck an optimistic tone on Tuesday evening,
telling reporters negotiations with Iran were “moving along very
nicely”.
“We’ll find out. We’ll know in 48 hours,” he said when
asked whether a deal was imminent. “The strait is going to be open very
soon, or they’re going to get hit very hard, and then the strait is
going to be open.”
Trump made the comments after he reportedly
decided over the weekend not to carry out what he had described as the
biggest US military attack since World War II, in line with his now
familiar pattern of repeatedly threatening to strike Iran before advocating at the last minute for diplomatic solutions instead.
Iran,
meanwhile, continues to deny holding direct talks with Washington. Its
officials have insisted that discussions are taking place with Oman over
how to manage the Strait of Hormuz. Oman, whose territorial waters the
strait also flows through, has long acted as a mediator between the two
countries.
Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil
Baghaei said the Oman talks have been “positive” and were continuing
although Iran’s Sepah News quoted an official as saying US military
threats remained the main obstacle to reaching an agreement.
The
diplomatic push comes as tensions spike in and around the Strait of
Hormuz. On Tuesday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO)
agency reported a cargo ship had been struck by an unidentified
projectile off Oman.
Commercial traffic through the waterway also
remains heavily disrupted. Only eight vessels transited the strait on
Monday, compared with roughly 130 ships per day before the US-Israel war
on Iran erupted on February 28. The situation has raised concerns that
prolonged disruptions could send oil prices sharply higher.
Against
that backdrop, mediators are racing to secure at least a temporary
agreement over the waterway before trying to revive a broader memorandum
of understanding (MoU) signed by Iran and the US in June, which was
intended to lay the groundwork for wider negotiations. Here’s what we
know:
(Al Jazeera)
What is being negotiated?
The
negotiations centre on two questions: who controls the Strait of Hormuz
and whether Iran should be allowed to impose fees on commercial vessels
to pass through it.
Sign up for Al Jazeera
Americas Coverage Newsletter
protected by reCAPTCHA
The
dispute over the waterway began after the US and Israel launched their
war on Iran. Tehran responded by closing the strait, disrupting one of
the world’s busiest shipping routes and causing global energy prices to
spike.
When Iran later reopened parts of the waterway, it ordered
commercial ships to use a northern shipping lane passing through Iranian
waters around Larak Island. The US later imposed a naval blockade on
Iranian ports in an effort to increase economic pressure on Tehran,
which was still managing to export its own oil via the strait.
After
a ceasefire in April, Washington proposed that ships instead use a
southern route along Oman’s coast. Iran rejected the proposal, arguing
eventually that it violated the US-Iran MoU and targeting several ships that had followed the Oman route.
Mediators
are now trying to broker a compromise that would allow commercial
shipping to resume while addressing the security concerns of both Iran
and Oman.
Below is the route map that Iran issued to ships it gave permission to pass during the war.
(Al Jazeera)
What does Iran want?
The
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman has said the talks with Oman are
focused on “establishing safe inbound and outbound shipping lanes” that
“uphold sovereign rights while also addressing the national security
considerations of both Iran and Oman”.
Baghaei said the
discussions have been assessed positively at both the political and
technical levels although differences remain over how shipping through
the strait would operate.
Iranian officials said outstanding
issues include the mechanism for reopening the waterway, maritime
service fees and broader security arrangements.
Tehran also
continues to insist it is negotiating only with Oman, not directly with
Washington, and maintains that Iran and Oman should jointly manage the
strait according to their respective territorial waters and they should
retain control of navigation there.
Furthermore, Iran has
intimated that it plans to introduce some form of fee system for ships.
Under international maritime law, tolls for passage cannot be levied on
international straits such as Hormuz but coastal states may charge for
services they provide, such as navigational assistance, pilotage and
environmental protection.
What does the US want?
US
officials said the Trump administration wants total freedom of
commercial navigation through the waterway without Iranian tolls or any
arrangement requiring ships to obtain Tehran’s approval before
transiting the strait.
A US official familiar with the
negotiations told The Associated Press news agency that any temporary
arrangement would not involve Iranian approval for ships to transit or
charges for using the waterway. The official said Washington remained
committed to restoring the previous system in which “no party controls
the lanes or the ability to transit through them”.
Speaking to reporters on Monday, Trump rejected any suggestion that Iran should be allowed to charge vessels using the strait.
“I’m not going to let them charge,” he said. “Anybody’s going to charge, we’ll charge.”
US
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also suggested the Hormuz
negotiations are separate from wider diplomacy over Iran’s nuclear
programme. “There’s the big deal, which is the one that has to do with
their nuclear ambitions,” Rubio said.
“The immediate deal and the one that you’ve seen a lot of focus on is the straits.”
What is on the table?
Despite
the Trump administration’s hardline public rhetoric, US media reports
suggested negotiators are moving towards a more conciliatory position.
Under
the proposal, according to the news website Axios, to which Trump has
spoken directly during the conflict, ships entering the Gulf would use a
northern shipping lane through Iranian waters while vessels leaving the
Gulf would travel through a southern lane in Omani waters coordinated
with Iran.
The arrangement would initially last 60 days, during which no transit fees would be charged, Axios reported.
The
Associated Press, quoting two regional officials, reported that
discussions also include possible service fees linked to maritime
security and environmental protection as well as a broader agreement
tied to lifting the US blockade on Iranian ports. It remained unclear if
the US would be willing to accept this.
One proposal
put forward earlier by Oman is reportedly based on operations in the
Strait of Malacca, which connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans. There,
Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore ask ships that use the strait to
voluntarily help fund navigation, environmental protection, and search
and rescue operations.
Negotiators
are also discussing the clearance of naval mines from the centre of the
strait before seeking a longer-term agreement on how the waterway
should operate, Axios reported.
The Reuters news agency, quoting a
senior Iranian source involved in the negotiations, reported that
Tehran has already dropped its original demand for full control over
shipping in both directions but is “unlikely to change its position”
further.
Iranian state media have outlined a slightly different
proposal. Press TV reported that negotiations had entered “a new phase”
with a “bilateral understanding within reach”.
Quoting a senior
Iranian official, the broadcaster said the talks aim to establish a new
“middle corridor” through the Strait of Hormuz that would eventually
replace the existing northern and southern routes while ensuring safe
navigation and protecting what it described as “Iran’s rights as a
coastal state”.
What are the main sticking points?
Much
of the reported framework for these talks appears to build on the MoU
signed by Iran and the US on June 17 rather than fully replacing it.
Under
Article 5 of that agreement, Iran agreed to allow commercial vessels to
pass through the Strait of Hormuz without charge for 60 days. However,
vague wording in the agreement gave rise to disagreements about who
ultimately had control over the strait and which routes ships could use.
That
temporary arrangement was designed to create time for wider peace
negotiations. The latest proposals, therefore, appear to focus less on
whether ships should be allowed through immediately and more on what
happens after the initial 60-day period expires.
The reported
framework also closely resembles a proposal outlined by Iranian Deputy
Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi last month when he said that “the
inbound shipping lane must be entirely under Iran’s control while part
of the outbound lane may remain under Oman’s control”.
The
remaining disagreements now appear to centre on who should administer
the waterway over the longer term and whether Iran would be allowed to
eventually collect fees for maritime services.
However, even if Iran and the US reach an agreement, experts said another obstacle could remain.
If
Iran is given responsibility for managing some of the shipping lanes,
international shipping companies may need to coordinate with Iranian
authorities. But US sanctions could prevent many companies from doing so
unless Washington grants an exemption.
Esfandyar Batmanghelidj,
founder and chief executive of the Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, a
think tank focusing on economic development and diplomacy in West and
Central Asia, said this may work in Iran’s favour.
“Iran can also take advantage of the fact that US sanctions may prohibit coordination or payments with the Iranian authorities.
“A
large portion of vessel owners will not engage the channel unless
expressly authorised by the Trump administration, putting the ball back
in Trump’s court to effectively endorse” a proposal, he said.
Why might the US agree to Iranian demands now?
The negotiations are being conducted as Washington faces growing military and economic pressure to avoid another escalation.
US media have reported
that concerns over dwindling defensive munitions have contributed to
Trump’s decision not to carry out his threatened large-scale strikes
against Iran.
Keeping the Strait of Hormuz mostly closed also
risks pushing up global energy prices, and, therefore, domestic petrol
prices, which would prove unpopular as the November midterm elections in
the US approach.
Meanwhile, oil analysts warned that if the
Strait of Hormuz disruptions continue, many nations could deplete their
oil stockpiles at record rates, which could further push up energy
prices to unprecedented levels.
With time running out, a temporary agreement may now be preferable for the US, experts said.
Trita
Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible
Statecraft, said this means Washington’s priority should be ensuring
ships can pass safely rather than preventing Iran from playing any role
in administering the strait.
“The Trump administration has
increasingly framed the objective as preventing Iran from ‘controlling’
the strait. Yet the central American interest in strategic waterways has
historically been less about who administers them than about whether
ships can pass through them freely, predictably and without
discrimination,” he said.
“Preventing a hostile state from
acquiring coercive leverage has generally been a means of preserving
passage, not an end that supersedes passage itself.”
If reopening
the strait requires acknowledging that Iran possesses some capacity to
regulate traffic in waters along its coast, therefore, Washington
“should not reject an agreement merely because it fails to preserve the
appearance of unqualified American dominance”, he said.
David Des
Roches, a former director of Arabian Peninsula affairs in the US
Department of Defense, said “what’s really needed here is some sort of
agreement that leads to Iran formally announcing that it will cease to
attack neutral civilian shipping whether in Omani waters or in
international waters.”
He told Al Jazeera that any eventual
agreement was, therefore, likely to reflect the reality that Iran cannot
simply be excluded from managing a waterway on its coast.
“I
think that the rough outlines of a deal are that Iran would deny free
international passage in areas of its territorial waters,” Des Roches
said. “I think that’s probably about the best that can be reached at
this point in time.”
0:42
Rubio: Progress made to reopen Strait of Hormuz
Could a Hormuz agreement end the crisis in the Middle East?
Not
immediately, no. While a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz would ease
one of the most immediate sources of tension between Iran and the US,
experts warned it would not resolve their wider disagreements.
If
shipping resumes, negotiators would still need to revive the broader
memorandum of understanding and eventually return to talks on Iran’s
nuclear programme.
Other regional flashpoints also remain unresolved, including the conflict
between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, attacks by Iran-aligned groups
within the region and continued disruptions to shipping in the Red Sea,
caused by the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, and also Trump’s
unpredictability and predisposition towards threatening military action.
Abas
Aslani, a senior research fellow at the Center for Middle East
Strategic Studies, told Al Jazeera the rapid swings between military
escalation and diplomacy have left the region in a state of deep
uncertainty.
“I think the region feels like a high-speed
roller-coaster as a couple of days ago. Everybody was bracing for a
massive escalation,” Aslani told Al Jazeera.
While an agreement
over Hormuz would be “a good start, … it will not magically solve all
the issues”, he said. Rather, it could allow both sides to return to
implementing the June MoU before working towards “a final agreement on
the nuclear issue”.
President Donald Trump’s
endorsed candidate lost a top battleground Republican primary in
Michigan — to a candidate who suspended his campaign last month.
Amir Hassan, a Navy veteran and former law enforcement officer from Flint backed by Trump, finished significantly behind Tom Smith on Wednesday. Hassan rallied with Trump in Milford, Michigan, just last week.
Smith, a retired engineer, had dropped out in mid-July and endorsed another candidate who ended up in third in the primary. Smith told POLITICO that he would now return to challenge first-term Democratic Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet for the purple 8th District.
“I look forward to working with Speaker [Mike] Johnson and the entire Republican team to expand our House majority and advance President Trump’s America First agenda to lower costs for working families and make America affordable again,” Smith said in a statement.
McDonald Rivet is among the more than a dozen Democratic incumbents seeking reelection in a district Trump
won in 2024. But a GOP strategist, granted anonymity to speak candidly,
characterized her as a “powerhouse.” The strategist added that Hassan had “clear flaws as a candidate” and the “GOP base was reluctant to support a dude named Amir Hassan.”
A
handful of Trump-endorsed candidates have lost state-level races this
year — including the governor’s races in Iowa and Georgia — but Hassan is the first congressional candidate to lose despite the president’s support this cycle.
