Thanks to everyone who joined this week’s live conversation. I truly appreciate all of the comments, questions, and engagement during the session—it makes these discussions far more valuable. If you have feedback about whether an end-of-week recap like this is useful, please let me know. I want these conversations to be as relevant and informative as possible.
Thank you Peter Sukowski, ANI, Mary Boudreau, Laurie Cantillo, Cathy Holmes, and many others for tuning into our live discussion today! We covered a lot of ground, from reflections on immigrant hospitality to updates on ICE detention and arrest data. I’m grateful for the thoughtful contributions from participants, and I welcome continued dialogue as we explore these issues together.
A few key discussion points and observations from the session:
My conversation with Anton Flores of Casa Alterna offered a grounded, relationship-centered perspective on working alongside immigrants, informed by his decades of community work in Georgia. His insights underscored the value of hospitality and connection during politically and socially challenging times.
On the data front, our team released significant updates to DetentionReports.com, which now allows users to search detention facilities by state, city, and ZIP code. The platform tracks population trends, facility characteristics, and data anomalies, offering a more transparent view of ICE operations. See the explanation of updates below.
Using recent data, we examined six ICE detention facilities in Southern California in the context of recent immigration enforcement activity in Los Angeles. Notably, the Adelanto ICE Processing Center and Mesa Verde have seen sharp increases in detainee numbers, suggesting they may be receiving many of those arrested locally.
We discussed how ICE sometimes moves people far from their point of arrest, potentially impacting legal access and family support. This practice can be strategic, given variations in case law across federal circuits.
A methodological update: my analysis indicates that ICE’s “book-in” data closely maps to ICE arrest numbers, at least in the current fiscal year. While these categories are technically distinct, they may be used as a reasonable proxy when tracking recent arrest trends.
While much of the conversation focused on data and enforcement trends, it was also a reminder that meaningful change often begins at the community level. Even amid policy constraints, there are opportunities to foster trust, offer practical support, and imagine more just systems.
If you have insights from on-the-ground work in California or elsewhere, or if you notice data patterns worth investigating, I’d love to hear from you. Please consider leaving a comment, sharing this post with others, and signing up if you haven’t already.
Support Public Scholarship
This newsletter is only possible because of your support. If you believe in keeping this work free and open to the public, consider becoming a paid subscriber. You can read more about the mission and focus of this newsletter and learn why, after three years, I finally decided to offer a paid option. If you already support this newsletter financially, thank you.
