Arkansas is home to fewer than three in every ten Marshallese-born U.S. residents who are not American citizens. Yet nearly three in every four recorded ICE arrests involving people from the Marshall Islands took place there.

The September analysis by Stop AAPI Hate shows how heavily immigration enforcement has fallen on Arkansas’s Marshallese community. The state has the country’s largest Marshallese population, concentrated in Northwest Arkansas. But community size alone does not explain the concentration of arrests.

Between January 20, 2025, and August 6, 2026, Arkansas accounted for approximately 74% of Marshallese ICE arrests nationwide, despite having approximately 28% of the Marshallese-born noncitizen population. Those figures describe where people live and where arrests happened. They do not mean that 74% of Marshallese residents were arrested.

The national findings also show a heavier burden on people from the Federated States of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, particularly when it comes to deportation.

Citizens of both countries can live and work in the United States without a visa under the Compacts of Free Association, known as COFA. Many have made their homes here for decades. But they can still face deportation, including after serving a criminal sentence and returning to work and family life.

Where Pacific Islander ICE Arrests Occurred: Top Five Locations

Stop AAPI Hate found that Arkansas, Hawaii, Guam, California and Iowa account for the largest share of recorded Pacific Islander ICE arrests between January 20, 2025, and August 6, 2026. Stop AAPI Hate Action

A larger share of enforcement

Stop AAPI Hate compared each country’s share of ICE enforcement with its share of Pacific Islander–born U.S. residents who are not American citizens.

This is a narrower population than everyone who identifies as Pacific Islander. It excludes U.S. citizens and uses estimates based on birthplace.

In those estimates, approximately 63 out of every 100 Pacific Islander–born noncitizens were born in the FSM or Marshall Islands.

People recorded as being from those two countries, however, accounted for approximately:

• 77 out of every 100 Pacific Islander ICE arrests;
• 78 out of every 100 Pacific Islander detention entries;
• 85 out of every 100 Pacific Islander deportations.

In each category, their share of enforcement was higher than their estimated share of the comparison population. The difference was greatest for deportations.

The counts show what those percentages represent:

Country of origin	Arrests	Detention entries	Deportations
Federated States of Micronesia	190 (47%)	184 (49%)	159 (49%)
Marshall Islands	118 (29%)	111 (29%)	114 (35%)
Tonga	30 (7%)	24 (6%)	18 (6%)
Palau	12 (3%)	11 (3%)	11 (3%)
Fiji	23 (6%)	21 (6%)	8 (2%)
Samoa	19 (5%)	18 (5%)	7 (2%)
Other Pacific Island countries combined	10 (2%)	10 (3%)	6 (2%)
Total	402	379	323

Percentages show each country’s share of all Pacific Islander events in that column and are rounded. Source: Stop AAPI Hate’s interactive ICE tracker.

These are counts of enforcement events, not necessarily different people. Totals should not be added together to estimate how many people were affected. They also do not show how many of the listed arrests eventually resulted in deportation.

More enforcement and longer detention

Across Pacific Islander countries overall, arrests increased 25%, detention entries increased 34%, and deportations increased 33% compared with an equally long period immediately before President Donald Trump’s second inauguration.

Those increases describe Pacific Islanders collectively. During the current reporting period, people from the FSM and Marshall Islands accounted for most recorded events, including 273 of the 323 deportations.

Pacific Islanders also spent considerably longer in detention. Stop AAPI Hate reported an average of 94 days before a final decision, compared with 39 days for non-Pacific Islanders. A single Pacific Islander detention involved an average of two facility placements.

For families waiting for news, those months can mean missed paychecks, uncertainty about who will care for children and difficulty keeping in contact as a relative is moved between facilities.

How local police encounters can lead to ICE

The concentration of Marshallese arrests in Arkansas comes as the state expands cooperation between local law enforcement and ICE.

Under Act 654, signed in April 2025, county sheriffs and the state Division of Correction must apply to participate in the federal 287(g) program. Municipal police departments can join voluntarily.

Some agreements operate inside jails. The Task Force Model allows trained officers to perform specified immigration-enforcement duties during routine policing, including traffic stops and patrols, under ICE supervision.

In its October 21 overview, Arkansas GRITA reported participation involving 58 of the state’s 75 counties, 76 municipalities and 12 state agencies.

GRITA’s reporting also shows that police can bring ICE into traffic stops without a formal agreement.

Its investigation identified 13 Tontitown traffic stops that led to 20 people being detained by ICE before the department signed its Task Force agreement in June 2026. Ten stops ended with warnings and three with citations. Several passengers detained by ICE were not accused of traffic offenses.

During one October 2025 stop involving a work van, police called ICE, which detained five occupants. No one was arrested on state or local charges related to that stop.

GRITA did not identify those detained as Marshallese, and the Stop AAPI Hate figures do not establish how many Marshallese arrests resulted from police partnerships. Together, however, the reports raise questions about how local policing contributes to the concentration of immigration enforcement in Arkansas.

What individual cases tell us

Enforcement totals don’t tell us why each person was arrested or deported, so we reviewed public records for Marshallese who have been returned (deporeted) to the RMI in 2025 provides some of that context. We will follow-up on interviews with people who have shared their experience with deportation with us.

Of 75 deportations in 2025, we found public records for 28. However, this is not a representative sample of offenses. More importantly, a recorded offense does not tell the whole story. Each person had family and friends, worked, and contributed to the community.

Were people deported for violent or sexual offenses? There were four for sexual offenses, three for aggravated assault and one case that involved brandishing a firearm. Other entries included battery (fighting), threats and endangerment. Eight mentioned drugs or drug paraphernalia, while three mentioned impaired driving.

These categories overlap. Some records listed several offenses, and entries involving drugs or alcohol also included theft, assault or court-compliance problems. In one case, a kid, who had drug paraphernalia on him, broke into some cars and entered a home and stole a pair of shoes.

Failure to appear, probation issues, obstruction and other court- or police-related matters appeared repeatedly, usually alongside another offense. The records also varied in what they established: some explicitly identified convictions, while others listed arrests, charges or an immigration officer’s assessment. In one case, an individual had pled guilty to terroristic threatening, which is a third degree felony offense, for what were just angry words in an argument.

Some cases concerned events years before deportation. At least four entries referred to arrests or other legal matters approximately six to ten years earlier.

Community advocates have argued that COFA citizens should face accountability in the United States, where many have spent most of their lives. Depending on the offense, that could include serving a sentence, participating in drug court, receiving substance-use treatment or completing anger-management classes. They say opportunities for rehabilitation are particularly important for people who arrived as children or who have children here.

For some, deportation comes after they have already completed those requirements.

Gideon Aron (who shared his story being detained in Guantanamo with us) was deported in August 2025, approximately seven years after his offense. He had served his sentence and completed court-ordered requirements, including anger-management classes. He became a supervisor at George’s, remained active in church, and cared for his children and mother. He has been repatriated to the Marshall Islands but his children and family are still in the United States.

His experience does not describe every case. However, it shows that a recorded offense cannot tell the whole story of a person’s life—or what deportation means for the family left behind.

Helping families navigate what comes next

The Arkansas Coalition of Marshallese told Stop AAPI Hate that unfamiliarity with U.S. procedures, including when a traffic citation requires a court appearance, can create further difficulties. Several non-profit orgranizations (including Arkansas Coalition of Marshallese, Alliance for Immigrant Respect and Education, Arkansas Justic Reform Coalition, Legal Aid of Arkansas) have also worked to assist families separated by deportation including interpretation, court accompaniment and help understanding legal requirements. 

For Marshallese and FSM families, deportation can mean leaving the place where they grew up, worked and raised children—even though COFA allowed them to make their homes here. Those who remain must find ways to care for children, replace lost income and maintain relationships across the ocean.

About the data: Stop AAPI Hate analyzed ICE records obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests by the Deportation Data Project. Population comparisons use 2020–2024 American Community Survey estimates through IPUMS. ICE’s country classifications do not establish ethnicity. Chikin Melele’s review of 2025 deportee records is a separate examination of available case information, not a complete accounting of every deportation.