Editing Openai/696c083a-4084-8000-8ee6-668d591b74ab (section)

=== Assistant: Yes — your reasoning is correct. ===
Yes — your reasoning is correct.

If ICE arrests someone outside the jail, that does not change the jail’s action or policy. From the jail’s perspective:
* The person was released
* The jail did not hold them for ICE
* The jail did not transfer custody to ICE

So those people do belong in the “close to 100% released” category when the question is:

: Do local authorities hold people for immigration authorities?

They do not.

===== The key distinction =====
* Custody decision (jail): Release at end of criminal authority
* Enforcement decision (ICE): Separate, post-release arrest

Even if ICE is waiting at the door, the jail still:
* Ends custody
* Opens the gate
* Releases the person

Legally and factually, that is a release, not a hold or transfer.

===== Clean, precise conclusion =====

A precise statement that would hold up under scrutiny is:

: Hennepin County releases virtually all individuals with deportation orders once their criminal custody ends; any subsequent ICE arrest occurs independently and does not involve the jail holding the person for immigration purposes.

So yes — “close to 100% are released” is accurate, as long as we are talking about jail behavior, not what happens afterward.

If you want, I can also help you phrase this in a way that anticipates and neutralizes the most common counterarguments.