**
The role of attorneys within the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has come under scrutiny as more legal professionals grapple with the moral implications of their work amid an aggressive deportation agenda. As the Biden administration faces increasing pressure over immigration policies, the experiences of these attorneys reveal a complex interplay of obligation, fear, and the consequences of their actions on vulnerable populations.
A Day in the Life of an ICE Attorney
In June 2025, Estefani Rodriguez, a prosecuting attorney for ICE, appeared visibly distressed as she navigated the tense atmosphere of an immigration courtroom in New York City. Tasked with presenting motions for the deportation of non-citizens, Rodriguez reflected the weight of the responsibilities that come with her role—one that has become increasingly fraught since the onset of Donald Trump’s second term. Surrounded by immigrants facing dire circumstances, several of whom lacked legal representation, Rodriguez’s anxiety was palpable. The courtroom, a site of legal proceedings, felt more like a battleground.
During her time there, Rodriguez disclosed to the judge that two immigrants, who had previously applied for asylum after crossing into the US from Mexico, were now barred from pursuing their claims. This revelation underscored the dramatic shifts in immigration policy that have left many seeking refuge in a precarious position. By the end of June, such scenarios were becoming routine, with ICE attorneys like Rodriguez trapped in a system that prioritised deportation over due process.
The Exodus of ICE Attorneys
Rodriguez’s resignation in August marked a growing trend among ICE attorneys disillusioned with their roles. After nearly a decade with the federal government, she stated on LinkedIn that her decision to leave was “difficult but necessary.” Her departure was not an isolated incident; numerous attorneys have chosen to exit, citing ethical dilemmas and the psychological toll of their work.
The current political climate has amplified these concerns. Reports indicate that ICE employs approximately 1,700 attorneys across the nation, all crucial to the administration’s target of deporting 1 million individuals annually. However, as asylum grants plummeted to a mere 11% in 2025—a stark contrast to previous years—the pressure on these attorneys has intensified. Many now feel compelled to conform to an increasingly punitive legal framework that prioritises deportation over humanitarian considerations.
Former ICE attorney Adam Boyd articulated this moral quandary, describing his decision to resign as a “moral decision” after witnessing the perversion of justice in immigration courts. Similar sentiments echo among others who have opted to leave, with many citing fear of retribution and professional ostracism as barriers to speaking out.
The Structure of Immigration Courts
Unlike traditional courts, US immigration courts operate under the Department of Justice, lacking the independence typical of judicial systems. This structure raises significant concerns about the fairness of proceedings. Immigrants facing charges do not have a right to free legal representation, exacerbating the vulnerability of those seeking asylum. Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have long condemned these courts as “kangaroo courts,” where the odds are stacked against the accused.
Within this framework, ICE attorneys are caught between a mandate to enforce immigration laws and a growing awareness of the human impact of their actions. Many attorneys, who come from immigrant backgrounds themselves, struggle to reconcile their profession with the realities facing those they prosecute. While some attorneys express a sense of duty to uphold the law, others feel a deep-seated conflict that weighs heavily on their conscience.
The Silence of ICE Attorneys
Despite the gravity of their work, many ICE attorneys remain reticent about their experiences. Conversations with former colleagues reveal a pervasive fear of backlash—both from the media and potential employers. George Pappas, a former immigration judge, noted that many attorneys are “scared shitless” of how they will be perceived should they leave the agency. The stigma associated with working for ICE can hinder future job prospects, leaving attorneys to remain silent about their inner turmoil.
The reluctance to speak out extends to social media, where many attorneys obscure their identities or omit their roles within ICE. This trend highlights an environment of fear and self-censorship that permeates the agency, where personal and professional reputations are at stake.
Why it Matters
The plight of ICE attorneys reflects broader issues within the US immigration system, where the interplay of legal obligation and ethical responsibility creates a troubling environment for both practitioners and those they serve. As the Biden administration grapples with immigration reform, understanding the experiences of these attorneys is crucial. Their stories illuminate the human cost of policy decisions and the urgent need for a more compassionate approach to immigration law that prioritises justice and humanity over enforcement. The path forward hinges on addressing these systemic flaws and fostering a legal framework that respects the rights and dignity of all individuals.