Senior officials at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) were informed as early as March of last year that the use of force by officers against civilians and enforcement targets was increasing sharply, several months before ICE and Border Patrol agents fatally shot two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. Internal emails reveal that following the inauguration of the Trump administration, the number of incidents where ICE officers used force—including deadly force, as well as non-lethal means to control, subdue individuals, or eliminate threats—rose rapidly, with such events occurring frequently across the United States. One email indicated that Caleb Vitello, then the head of ICE's Enforcement and Removal Operations, received a report on March 20 stating that ICE officers had reported 67 use-of-force incidents during the first two months of the Trump administration, compared to just 17 during the same period in 2024—an increase of nearly fourfold. Another email showed that just days earlier, Vitello had been notified that the number of force incidents in the first two weeks of March alone had quadrupled compared to the same period the previous year. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) maintains that its law enforcement personnel adhere to training standards and exercise "extreme restraint" when using force. DHS did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the documents. The email contents contradict official statements and rebut claims made by administration supporters following the Minneapolis shootings, who attempted to downplay incidents of excessive force by ICE by characterizing them as rare. During a Thursday oversight hearing regarding the response to the Minneapolis incident, Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma stated, "These are difficult issues that warrant deep examination because they are both tragic and egregious, but thankfully, such events are not common." Incident reports from law enforcement operations nationwide document instances where officers used force during arrests and apprehensions. These include an event on March 10, in which Border Patrol and ICE officers smashed a woman's car window to apprehend two undocumented immigrants; one immigrant was tasered and subsequently required medical treatment for vomiting and multiple abrasions. Reports from the first two months of the Trump administration also noted at least one death resulting from an encounter with immigration officials. The emails and incident reports suggest that cases involving the use of force by ICE and Border Patrol are not merely isolated incidents amplified on social media, nor are they confined to major urban centers like Minneapolis. They also indicate that as the Trump administration intensified efforts to deport undocumented immigrants, agency leadership was already aware that officers across the country were employing more aggressive tactics. The correspondence and documents do not show that ICE leadership took urgent action in response to this trend, whether by increasing training or verifying if the rise in force incidents correlated with an overall increase in enforcement and removal operations. Instead, the files reveal that ICE and DHS officials preferred to publicly highlight another trend: assaults against law enforcement officers had also reached record highs. An email sent to Vitello on March 20 emphasized that during the same period when force usage was rising, assaults against ICE officers had increased more than fourfold. The emails indicate that ICE leadership was eager to prosecute such cases. One unit chief wrote in an email to Vitello that a regional office team could "compile summaries of criminal elements, definitions of assault, etc., to brief the entire workforce, in order to facilitate the submission of more cases for prosecution." When faced with questions about ICE's enforcement tactics, officials insisted that officers were adequately trained and blamed the escalation of conflicts on officials in Democratic-led states and cities. As recently as January of this year, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem denied allegations that ICE officers were overusing force. On January 15, when asked if ICE had overstepped boundaries, Noem told reporters, "Our ICE agents operate within the law and strictly according to their training requirements." In a statement, Chioma Chukwu, Executive Director of the watchdog group American Oversight, said these documents paint "a deeply disturbing picture of ICE's use of violent tactics." The release of these files comes as Democrats and some Republicans are pushing for significant reforms to ICE's enforcement methods and training, with related negotiations being incorporated into DHS funding discussions and efforts to end a partial government shutdown. Last week, members of the House and Senate Homeland Security Committees questioned Todd Lyons, who succeeded Vitello as acting director, about ICE's use of force and other tactics nationwide. During Thursday's hearing, Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky stated, "Clearly, public trust has been lost. To rebuild trust in ICE and Border Patrol, they must admit mistakes, be transparent, clarify the rules of engagement, and commit to reform." The documents also disclosed further details about how ICE agents are handling another contentious legal issue: whether ICE agents require judicial warrants to enter homes. This matter has become a point of contention between Democrats and the administration in funding negotiations. A July presentation documented a controversial administration policy: allowing ICE to enter homes using only administrative warrants—issued by the agency itself, not a court—to apprehend and deport undocumented immigrants who had already received final orders of removal. The content of this presentation conflicted with guidance from a May memo issued by Lyons, which stated that agents could enter homes using Form I-205, applicable to immigrants with final removal orders who are subject to deportation. However, instructor notes accompanying the July presentation indicated that if directly questioned about Form I-205, instructors should inform trainees that the policy was "under review." This suggests the policy was not as firmly established as previously believed. The administration argues that entering homes with only administrative warrants has a legal basis. Congressional Democrats insist that ICE still requires warrants signed by a judge for home entries. Commenting on this discrepancy, Chukwu said, "This indicates that ICE is aware its practices are deeply problematic, but is deliberately concealing this to avoid public scrutiny."