Indiana Rep. André Carson posted on X that 96% of people ICE arrested in July had no prior violent criminal conviction, calling the arrests racial profiling rather than a public-safety effort and saying he has opened a congressional inquiry into ICE activity in Indianapolis while opposing agency funding. The post quickly drew a large wave of replies and quote posts, many arguing that unlawful presence itself is grounds for enforcement and that a violent conviction is not required for deportation.
The video shows Carson speaking to the camera in a suit. He says, “These arrests don’t make our city safer,” and refers to “chasing a car across multiple lanes of traffic, as ICE has reportedly done in Indy.” he adds, “So, ICE is making our city less safe.”
Later in the clip, he talks about who was “detained” and says, “we’ll find that these arrests are not based on criminals, but instead, they appear to be based on racial profiling, unfortunately.” The footage is an interview excerpt only. It does not show an arrest, and it does not include the full interview or independent confirmation of the statistics he cites.
In the accompanying caption, Carson wrote that 96% of people ICE arrested in July “did not have a prior violent criminal conviction,” that the arrests “aren’t about safety,” and that they are “about racial profiling.” He said he submitted a congressional inquiry into ICE’s presence in Indianapolis and “refuse[s] to fund ICE as they terrorize our communities.”
His office has separately described that inquiry as seeking details from the Department of Homeland Security on enforcement in Indianapolis, including how many people have been detained. Those figures and the agency’s response have not been independently established in the post.
Responses to Carson’s ICE Remarks Online
Many commenters rejected the idea that a prior violent conviction is required for immigration enforcement. One widely liked reply said, “THEY BROKE THE LAW AND MUST GO.” Another wrote, “They all gotta go.”
A third said, “I don’t care if they have a violent criminal conviction or not, they’re here illegally, and they have to go.”
Others made the same point in legal terms. “A criminal conviction is NOT a requirement to be deported. Entering our country illegally is,” one user wrote.
Another asked, “Since when do you need to have a prior violent crime arrest to be arrested for a crime you are committing?” and added, “Illegal immigration IS the crime.”
A smaller share treated the 96% figure as a reason for scrutiny, with one commenter saying that if most people arrested “didn’t have a prior violent conviction that deserves serious scrutiny” and that enforcement “should be focused on genuine threats to public safety.”
For now, Carson’s remarks sit inside a broader argument over how ICE is conducting arrests in Indianapolis and what counts as a public-safety target. Online replies remain focused on whether a prior violent conviction is required for enforcement, or whether unlawful presence alone is enough.
