OpenICE: Open-Source US Immigration Detention Dashboard

Dashboard framing and “scoreboard” concern

• Some worry the real-time counters feel like a “scoreboard” that could be read as wins rather than harms, especially by those who support crackdowns.
• Suggestions to mitigate this: invert visual language so “more is worse,” clarify normative stance in text, and avoid broker-like green “gains.”
• The creator explicitly wants to show that rising detentions and longer stays are negative, and defends using red for increases.

Data categories, labels, and interpretation

• The “criminal / other” split is widely praised as immediately revealing and contrary to a “violent gang member” narrative.
• Several ask for finer breakdowns: felony vs misdemeanor, what “other”/“other immigration violator” actually includes, and better explanation of ICE “threat levels.”
• Some object to ICE’s term “violator” as presuming guilt; alternative, more neutral labels are proposed. Others argue that changing terminology is itself political framing.
• Confusion over the pie chart’s central percentage (“Not Convicted”) leads to UX criticism.
• People want longer time series and separation of ICE interior arrests from CBP border turn-backs, noting that conflating them masks a sharper ICE increase.

Economic impact vs human costs

• There’s disagreement about emphasizing lost GDP/tax revenue:
  • Pro: may persuade “economics-only” audiences and underline hypocrisy of costly, performative cruelty.
  • Con: risks trivializing suffering, or being reframed as “jobs Americans should have,” undermining the intended message.
• Some counter that undocumented labor fills chronic shortages; others focus on remittances and wage suppression.

Legality, due process, and enforcement philosophy

• One side stresses that entering or remaining without status violates law, so deportation is legitimate; if laws are bad, change them electorally.
• The other side emphasizes:
  • visa overstay as civil, not criminal;
  • asylum and TPS as legal channels;
  • reports of citizens, legal residents, and low‑threat people detained, family separations, opaque processes, and alleged court-order violations.
• Debate arises over what “due process” requires: some say it is whatever current law and courts define; others argue constitutional protections are being eroded in practice.

Historical analogies and rhetoric

• Some compare current trends, funding levels, and dehumanizing rhetoric to early fascist dynamics, warning that large systems of detention can escalate.
• Others reject Holocaust/Nazi comparisons as offensive and a slippery slope argument.

Proposed enhancements and related tools

• Requested additions:
  • detention conditions and personal testimonies;
  • counts of children separated, citizens wrongly detained, lawsuits, and per‑detainee costs;
  • better contextual text stating the normative stance.
• One commenter references a separate police-tracking tool as a model for tying incidents to individual officials, though others worry about doxxing risks.