ICE Tracks 54,000 Immigrants via Ankle Monitors: What It Means 2026

The US is tracking nearly 54,000 immigrants through GPS-enabled ankle monitors as part of a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) electronic surveillance program, according to private prison corporation The Geo Group. This dramatic increase from just 17,000 early last year signals a major shift in immigration enforcement technology and raises critical questions about privacy, cost, and due process.

The numbers were disclosed in Geo Group's earnings call on Thursday, revealing that while overall enrollment in ICE's intensive supervision appearance program (ISAP) remained flat at about 184,000, the mix of surveillance methods has changed drastically. Executives confirmed that a large number of participants were moved from phone check-ins to ankle monitors, a more expensive and intrusive option.

Why the Surge in Ankle Monitor Use?

ICE directed agents in June 2025 to move more immigrants enrolled in ISAP to the ankle monitor program, according to a memo obtained by the Washington Post. This policy shift, dubbed "ankle monitors for all" by critics, is part of a broader effort to increase oversight of non-detained immigrants. The Geo Group, which owns BI Inc, the company running ISAP, has seen revenues climb as a result.

Ankle monitors cost ICE a little more than $2 per day per monitor, while the SmartLink app—a facial recognition and location tracking smartphone app—costs about $0.96 per immigrant. With over 127,000 immigrants currently using SmartLink, the financial implications are significant. George Zoley, Geo Group chairman and CEO, noted on the earnings call that "if this trend continues, the technology and case management mix shift will continue to increase revenues and earnings generated under the ISAP contract even if overall participation counts remain relatively stable."

Cost Comparison: Ankle Monitors vs. SmartLink App

The cost differential is stark, but the human impact is even more profound. A new class-action lawsuit filed against ICE in June alleges that this policy "imposes continuous, real-time GPS monitoring without individualized justifications." Immigration advocacy groups argue that subjecting individuals to constant tracking without evidence of flight risk or danger violates constitutional protections.

Legal and Ethical Concerns

The lawsuit highlights that many immigrants are being placed on ankle monitors without a hearing or individualized assessment. This one-size-fits-all approach has sparked outrage among civil liberties organizations, who see it as a form of pre-trial detention without the safeguards. The continuous GPS monitoring also raises privacy concerns, as the government can track an individual's every movement 24/7.

Furthermore, the financial burden often falls on the immigrants themselves. While ICE pays Geo Group for the devices, many immigrants are required to pay for installation and monthly fees, which can be prohibitive for those already struggling financially. This creates a two-tiered system where wealthier individuals can afford less intrusive alternatives, while others face constant surveillance.

Key Takeaways from the Ankle Monitor Expansion

• Sharp increase: Ankle monitor usage jumped from 17,000 to nearly 54,000 in just over a year.
• Profit motive: Geo Group benefits financially from the shift, as ankle monitors generate more revenue per person than the SmartLink app.
• Policy change: A June 2025 ICE memo directed agents to move more ISAP enrollees to ankle monitors.
• Legal challenge: A class-action lawsuit alleges the policy violates due process and privacy rights.
• Cost disparity: Ankle monitors cost more than twice as much as the SmartLink app, raising questions about resource allocation.

What This Means for Immigrants and the Public

For immigrants in the ISAP program, the shift to ankle monitors represents a significant loss of freedom and privacy. Unlike phone check-ins, which allow for some flexibility, GPS monitors track location in real time, creating a digital footprint that can be used in future proceedings. This can also lead to stigmatization and difficulty finding employment or housing, as some landlords and employers view ankle monitors as a red flag.

For the general public, the expansion raises broader questions about the use of surveillance technology in immigration enforcement. Is this a necessary tool to ensure compliance with court appearances, or is it an overreach that erodes civil liberties? The answer may depend on one's perspective, but the data clearly shows a trend toward more intrusive monitoring.

FAQ

As the debate over immigration surveillance continues, it's clear that the use of ankle monitors is not just a logistical decision but a policy choice with profound implications. Whether this trend will continue or face legal setbacks remains to be seen, but for now, nearly 54,000 immigrants are living under constant electronic watch.