Federal immigration authorities have been quietly tapping into a vast network of insurance and medical claims data as part of their efforts to locate and deport undocumented individuals, according to internal materials reviewed by 404 Media. The revelations are drawing renewed scrutiny to the scope of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) data surveillance operations – and have prompted a legal challenge from more than a dozen states.
At the center of the controversy is ISO ClaimSearch, an expansive database maintained by Verisk, a private company that compiles insurance claims information from across the property and casualty sector. Originally designed to detect fraud and recover stolen vehicles, the platform is now being used by ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) unit to help identify immigration enforcement targets.
The system houses more than 1.8 billion records, including detailed personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers, license plates, Social Security and tax identification numbers – even health insurance claims and medical billing data.
ICE has not publicly commented on its access to ISO ClaimSearch, but internal documents obtained by 404 Media confirm that agents are permitted to use the database when conducting background investigations linked to homeland security activities. Access is granted through the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB), a non-profit supported by over 1,200 insurance companies.
Verisk, which operates the database, insists that ICE is not a direct client. “ClaimSearch does not track immigration or citizenship status,” a company spokesperson said in a statement. The NICB likewise defended the tool’s purpose, saying it exists to “prevent and deter insurance crimes” and provides a public benefit. Neither organization denied ICE’s access.
Privacy advocates argue the use of insurance infrastructure for immigration enforcement marks a troubling expansion of ICE’s capabilities. “This is yet another example of data being collected for one reason and used for a completely different, and harmful, purpose,” Mao said.
Concerns over ICE’s growing surveillance reach have intensified since the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced in June that it had agreed to share Medicaid enrollment data with immigration authorities. The move has sparked legal action from 20 states – including California, Colorado, and New York – seeking to block the transfer of sensitive health information to DHS and ICE.
Filed in US District Court in Northern California, the lawsuit argues the decision violates decades of federal privacy protections enshrined in the Medicaid Act. “The personal healthcare data collected about Medicaid beneficiaries is confidential,” Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said. “There’s no reason to share this sensitive data with immigration or law enforcement agencies.”
The authorities argue that the data-sharing initiative is aimed at ensuring that Medicaid benefits are limited to those lawfully eligible to receive them. Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary at DHS, defended the effort, citing a surge in enrollments linked to unauthorized immigration. “To keep [President Donald Trump’s] promise after Joe Biden flooded our country with tens of millions of illegal aliens,” McLaughlin said, “we’re exploring an initiative to ensure that illegal aliens are not receiving benefits meant for law-abiding Americans.”
That rationale has done little to quell critics. The lawsuit warns that any transfer of Medicaid data could cause widespread fear among immigrant communities and lead to voluntary disenrollment – undermining public health and placing new financial burdens on state healthcare systems. Supporters argue that people legally in the country have nothing to fear.
This is not the first time ICE has been accused of sidestepping legal safeguards to collect personal data. A 2023 watchdog report found the agency had unlawfully acquired smartphone location data harvested from consumer apps. ICE was urged to cease the practice pending further oversight – a recommendation it reportedly ignored.
Other revelations have followed: ICE reportedly gained access to CLEAR, a utility records database operated by Thomson Reuters, and has deployed Mobile Fortify, a facial recognition app using Customs and Border Protection systems, in field operations.
These tools operate largely in obscurity and without explicit consent from the individuals whose data they contain. Critics argue that federal immigration enforcement is increasingly dependent on commercial data networks that were not designed for – and are not governed by – traditional law enforcement standards.
The trend has triggered alarm across civil liberties organizations and statehouses alike. The plaintiffs in the Medicaid lawsuit argue that the use of insurance and health data for immigration enforcement is “creating fear and confusion” among legal residents and citizens alike. They are asking the court to prohibit both HHS and DHS from proceeding with the data sharing and to enforce limits on how federal agencies repurpose sensitive personal information.
While ICE and DHS have not responded to requests for comment, the implications of their evolving approach are clear. “What we are witnessing,” Mao said, “is a steady, strategic expansion of ICE’s data arsenal – with little oversight, and profound consequences for civil rights.”
