Lead
President Trump’s expanded deportation campaign has moved beyond major metropolitan centers into small towns and exurban communities, with actions documented as of Feb. 13, 2026. Places such as Cornelius, Ore. (pop. 14,763), Coon Rapids, Minn., and several West Virginia towns have seen ICE operations that local officials say strained limited resources and alarmed neighbors. Federal officials report hundreds of arrests during recent targeted “surge” actions, while some localities have declared emergencies or asked for state assistance. The immediate result has been heightened fear in affected neighborhoods and renewed tensions between local authorities and federal immigration agents.
Key Takeaways
- ICE has pushed enforcement beyond large cities into rural, suburban and exurban areas, saying it uses “data-driven intelligence” to guide deployments.
- Cornelius, Ore. (population 14,763) declared a state of emergency and sought state funds to hire additional police to monitor federal agents after recent operations.
- In Coon Rapids, about 15 miles from downtown Minneapolis, residents reported federal agents waiting for hours outside homes, prompting community alarm.
- Last month, ICE “surge teams” from Philadelphia carried out operations across West Virginia towns — Martinsburg, Moorefield (under 3,000 residents), Morgantown, Beckley, Huntington and Charleston — with officials reporting more than 650 arrests.
- Smaller jurisdictions report stretched resources: a single ICE action can overwhelm local law enforcement and social services in towns with modest budgets and personnel.
- Federal statements emphasize nationwide reach; local leaders emphasize local disruption and the need for clearer coordination and oversight.
Background
The Trump administration has prioritized large-scale removals as a centerpiece of immigration policy, ordering expanded enforcement that has often focused on sanctuary cities and large immigrant communities. Over the past year that posture broadened: federal authorities have signaled intent to reach nonmetropolitan areas, arguing that enforcement must be nationwide. ICE has characterized deployments as intelligence-driven, aiming at individuals with criminal records or those who have final orders of removal.
Small towns and exurbs, however, typically lack the specialized units and budgets large cities maintain. Towns with populations under 50,000 frequently rely on state or county resources for major incidents, and the arrival of federal teams—sometimes from other regions—can produce operational and political friction. Local officials say that, beyond arrests, the presence of federal agents affects community trust with law enforcement and complicates local public-safety priorities.
Main Event
Reports compiled by local officials and residents describe ICE teams appearing in communities with limited public notice. In Cornelius, Oregon, town leaders reported coordinated ICE activity that led the council to declare a state of emergency and ask the governor for funds to augment police oversight. Officials cited concerns about officer staffing and residents’ sense of security.
In Coon Rapids, an exurban community roughly 15 miles north of Minneapolis, neighbors described agents stationed across from a family home for several hours before making an arrest. Community members say such scenes—rare until now—have produced lasting fear among immigrant families and bystanders. Local law enforcement officials said they were not always informed in advance about the scope or timing of federal actions.
Separately, ICE dispatched teams from Philadelphia to multiple West Virginia towns this winter, executing operations in Martinsburg, Moorefield, Morgantown, Beckley, Huntington and Charleston. Federal officials reported arresting more than 650 individuals across that sweep. Moorefield, with a population under 3,000, and several other towns in the series, underscored the agency’s reach into communities with limited infrastructure to absorb large enforcement actions.
Analysis & Implications
Operationally, moving enforcement into small towns shifts costs and coordination burdens onto local governments. Police departments in smaller municipalities often lack immigration-dedicated units, legal counsel for extended detention or translation services—resources that suddenly become necessary when federal enforcement intensifies. That mismatch can lead to emergency budget requests, temporary reallocation of patrols, and heightened demand for county or state assistance.
Politically, the expansion complicates traditional partisan maps. Many affected towns are not strongly partisan strongholds; residents and leaders who typically focus on local governance now confront national immigration policy in their communities. That may reshape local political debates and influence state-level responses, including calls for clearer notification protocols between ICE and local law enforcement.
Legally and socially, broader enforcement raises questions about civil liberties, due process and community policing. Immigrant families report chilling effects on cooperation with local authorities, which can hamper public-safety investigations and community outreach. Conversely, federal officials frame the operations as targeting public-safety risks and enforcing existing orders of removal, arguing that jurisdictional breadth is necessary to fulfill mandates.
Comparison & Data
| Location | Type | Population (approx.) | Noted Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cornelius, Ore. | Small town | 14,763 | State of emergency; requested state funding for police monitoring |
| Coon Rapids, Minn. | Exurb | — | Agents observed outside family home; local alarm |
| Moorefield, W.Va. | Small town | <3,000 | Part of ICE “surge”; region saw hundreds of arrests |
| Various W.Va. towns | Small/medium towns | All ≤50,000 | ICE reported more than 650 arrests in the series |
The table highlights how ICE’s recent activity covered a range of community sizes. Even when total arrests number in the hundreds across a region, individual town impacts can be concentrated: a single arrest or multi-hour operation can stretch a local department’s capacity and affect dozens of residents and family members.
Reactions & Quotes
Local reactions have ranged from alarm to calls for clearer coordination. Officials and community members emphasize the human and administrative toll of operations in towns unaccustomed to large-scale enforcement.
“People here are frightened; this kind of action was unexpected in our town,”
Bill Carlson, Coon Rapids resident
“ICE says it deploys nationwide based on intelligence, operating in rural, urban and suburban areas,”
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (agency statement)
“Small municipalities lack the staffing and legal resources to absorb surges; we need clearer protocols,”
Local municipal official (requested anonymity)
Unconfirmed
- Whether ICE will sustain the same pace of small-town operations beyond the most recent waves is not confirmed by independent federal scheduling documents.
- Comprehensive national totals for arrests in small towns and exurbs during this enforcement phase remain incomplete pending consolidated reporting from ICE.
- The long-term effect on local cooperation with police—measured in formal metrics like reporting rates—has not yet been quantified.
Bottom Line
The administration’s enforcement strategy has demonstrable reach into towns that historically have been on the periphery of national immigration debates. For impacted communities, the immediate consequences are practical and emotional: stretched public-safety budgets, disrupted neighborhoods and heightened fear among immigrant families. Local leaders are calling for clearer notification, state support, and mechanisms to protect community trust while addressing public-safety concerns.
Going forward, observers should watch for formal changes in federal-local coordination, legal challenges that could constrain operations, and political responses at the state level. How small towns and exurbs absorb or resist these enforcement actions will shape both local governance and broader public debates about the scope and practice of national immigration policy.
Sources
- The New York Times (news organization)
- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (official federal agency)