DHS officials say alternatives to detention decisions are case‑by‑case; courts often decide monitoring

During the question‑and‑answer portion, reporters asked who selects technologies used in alternatives to detention (ATD), such as ankle monitors, telephonic reporting or mobile apps. DHS officials and the Secretary said selection is individualized and can involve judges, detention operators, or case processors.

"Well, it could be the judge. It could be the operation that's operating this the detention center at the time. it be the processors," one DHS official said, describing a multi‑factor decision process. Officials added that criminal history, court attendance records and the specifics of an individual's case are considered when deciding whether to parole someone on monitoring.

Officials noted high non‑appearance rates in immigration court (they stated rates 'way over' 80% in the discussion), which they said factors into decisions to use supervision or deny parole. They emphasized supervisors and officers can escalate or de‑escalate monitoring as cases evolve; courts have a role when cases are active.