Corporate Exodus: Global Firms Cut Ties With U.S. Immigration Agency Amid Mounting Scrutiny
Corporate Exodus: Global Firms Cut Ties With U.S. Immigration Agency Amid Mounting Scrutiny
In a significant shift, a growing list of international companies is moving to end business relationships with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as public and political pressure intensifies over the agency's role in immigration enforcement.
The trend crossed the Atlantic this week when Paris-based consulting giant Capgemini announced it would sell its U.S. division that held a $4.8 million contract with ICE. The contract, awarded in mid-December, was for "skip tracing services"—a process of locating hard-to-find individuals using online data and sources like voter registries. The decision followed scrutiny from a French corporate watchdog and questions from France's finance minister.
"The nature and scope of this work has raised questions compared to what we typically do," Capgemini CEO Aiman Ezzat stated, adding that legal restrictions on government work prevented the parent company from exercising "appropriate control" over the subsidiary's operations. The unit represented a minor fraction of the group's global revenue.
The backlash is not confined to Europe. In Canada, real estate firm Jim Pattison Developments—part of billionaire Jim Pattison's conglomerate—canceled plans to sell a Virginia warehouse to the Department of Homeland Security for use in "supporting ICE operations." The move came after British Columbia Green Party leader Emily Lowan called for a boycott of the group's wide-ranging businesses.
Meanwhile, Vancouver-based social media management company Hootsuite faced protests at its headquarters over its work with ICE's public affairs office. CEO Irina Novoselsky defended the partnership, stating their tools were not used for tracking or surveillance, but acknowledged the "devastating" impact of recent enforcement actions.
The corporate retreat follows a series of nationwide protests in the U.S. over the administration's immigration crackdown, which included two fatal shootings by ICE agents in Minneapolis. Analysts note the trend reflects a broader reputational risk calculation, as companies weigh government contracts against potential consumer and employee backlash in an increasingly polarized climate.
In Oklahoma City, local property owners backed out of a potential deal with Homeland Security, earning praise from the mayor. Major U.S. retailers like Target and Best Buy have also publicly called for a "de-escalation of tensions."
Voices from the Public
"This is a moral reckoning. Companies are finally realizing that profiting from an agency linked to family separations and tragic deaths is unacceptable. It's about time shareholder value considered human value."
— Maria Chen, Immigration Rights Advocate, Seattle
"The knee-jerk reaction from these corporations is disappointing. They're bowing to activist pressure and abandoning a federal agency tasked with enforcing the law. This sets a dangerous precedent where mob rule dictates government operations."
— David Riggs, Former Federal Security Contractor, Dallas
"As an investor, I see this as prudent risk management. The political and social landscape around immigration is volatile. Disentangling now protects long-term brand equity and employee morale, especially for consumer-facing businesses."
— Priya Sharma, Portfolio Manager, Toronto
"It's pure hypocrisy! These companies were happy to cash the checks until they got caught. Selling a division doesn't erase complicity. This is PR damage control, not ethical leadership."
— Jake Torres, Software Engineer & Activist, San Francisco