A new report sheds light on the unprecedented growth of the US government’s immigration surveillance arsenal, revealing fresh details about how spending on technology and AI tools to find and track migrants has soared to record levels during Donald Trump’s second term.
The report, released this week, analyzed US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) contracts with 11 companies the authors said provide surveillance tech. They found the money awarded to these firms doubled from 2024 to 2025, to just over $310m – and in 2026, that number soared to a record $513m.
Researchers traced these contracts as far back as 2013, when they hovered under $50m, and found a steady increase over time – with a bigger jump over the last two years. The report notes this new growth is primarily driven by huge new contracts for Palantir, a data analytics company that is central to ICE’s enforcement operations, as well as Anduril, a defense company that has built AI-powered surveillance systems, tech-infused border towers, drones and sensors.
The sweeping analysis, which was produced by immigration rights organization Mijente, legal advocates Just Futures Law and research group Surveillance Resistance Lab, comes as a large influx of money has made ICE the best-funded law enforcement agency in the US, and supercharged immigration agencies’ surveillance ambitions.
The report highlights how ICE is directing these taxpayer funds towards multimillion-dollar federal contracts for a diverse group of tools and services. They include money for data brokers, analytics software, social media scrapers, facial recognition technologies, hacking devices and spyware to break into phones, external contractors that the study’s authors characterize as “bounty hunters” and “autonomous” border towers and drones.
The report also details how the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE and CBP, doesn’t just buy surveillance products, but also operates a billion-dollar incubator and funds research, programs and partnerships that actively shape the tech that’s created. The authors note that this money has been crucial in “providing early funding for companies that go on to be major surveillance technology providers”.
These initiatives include the Silicon Valley Innovation Partnership that provides up to $2m to startups for prototyping, and the DHS component of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), which channels federal money towards technology-focused startups and small businesses, so they can become commercially viable.
The program has provided a total of $845m across 500 companies since 2004, according to the study. The Trump administration has awarded money through SBIR in recent years for tools that would allow agents to harvest biometric data from cellphones and use AI to analyze airport CCTV feeds and automatically catalog passengers’ physical characteristics.
DHS did not respond to a Guardian request for comment before publication.
The Guardian spoke with one of the report’s authors, Paromita Shah – executive director of Just Futures Law – about the government’s expansive use of surveillance tech. This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.
What worries you most about this new influx of money?
I am worried about an agency that has little oversight from Congress and internally receiving what’s essentially a slush fund. We have seen what CBP and ICE can do with a huge influx of money already – and how many civil rights violations are occurring on the ground. We know they’re building the capability to do a new type of invasive surveillance based on this new domestic terrorism memo that sets up the infrastructure to surveil people the US considers to be anti-American.
One of the most recognizable tech tools we’ve seen federal immigration agents use is the facial recognition app Mobile Fortify. They’ve scanned thousands of immigrants’ and protesters’ faces. What concerns you most about the use of AI and facial recognition?
DHS has publicly disclosed that it uses more than 10 AI-enabled facial recognition tools. This kind of street-level surveillance raises questions about consent and whether a warrant was obtained. How many times have we seen ICE and CBP agents snapping pictures of us and downloading it into some kind of system? It seems as though DHS is creating a database of people who object to their actions. [ICE has denied that it maintains “any kind of database of US citizens protesting ICE activities”.]
In the report, you say federal immigration agencies aren’t just buying surveillance tech but also funding and testing different tools. Why could this be problematic?
It shows the circular nature of the process – and it’s also concerning because DHS doesn’t care if it violates rights, they just want to deploy the tech. There’s also an assumption they’re giving funding to baby companies. That’s true sometimes, but occasionally that money is going to bigger ones.
[The report notes that Anduril was able to get SBIR money in 2020, even though it was valued at around $2bn.]
The report describes DHS and ICE viewing Palantir’s data management services as integral to their functioning. What does it mean for one tech analytics company to hold so much power?
It’s troubling that Palantir could have the power to define what counts as lawful and what doesn’t, what is privacy and what is not. That seems like the direction we’re heading in.
[A Palantir spokesperson said in an emailed statement that the company “is not in the business of collecting or storing data, we do not conduct surveillance, and we are not involved in setting immigration policies”.]
What are some less high-profile uses of tech surveillance that jumped out at you?
What surprised me was learning that Equifax was a key data broker that may not do direct work with ICE, but certainly shares data with them. We all need a credit company to own a car or rent an apartment. [Equifax did not respond to a Guardian request for comment on the new report. The Guardian previously reported that ICE has paid for access to data from Appriss, a company owned by Equifax].
It’s frightening to me that DHS has a drone program. We heard reports that immigration enforcement was using them during surges in Minneapolis. What does it mean to have a drone floating outside your window and looking into your home v an agent who has to come to your door and ask for permission to come in? It feels dystopian.
Berla iVe helps law enforcement extract data from devices you connect to your car, like your iPad and iPhone. The VeriWatch works like a smartwatch and tracks migrants waiting for immigration proceedings. Then, there’s Tangles, which uses AI to create dossiers based on people’s online presence – from social media to financial records.
Why was it important for you to track how tech executives and venture capital are influencing and helping fund Trump’s immigration agenda?
People need to realize that DHS is not merely a police force – but we’re standing in a moment where tech oligarchs have captured key parts of the DHS budget and are using it to fund their own companies.
You were able to track a lot of DHS spending on surveillance tech, but how much remains hidden?
There’s a lot the government is not sharing with us. I’m absolutely sure we’re missing things and that is the point: we should be worried.
