| Outcome | Probability | Yes Bid | Yes Ask | 24h Change | Volume | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mask ban | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Visible identification | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Mandatory body-worn cameras | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Separate HSI from ICE | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Abolish ICE | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| QR-code identification | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
This market asks which reforms to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will be enacted into law during the 2026 calendar year. It matters because changes to ICE authorities, procedures, or oversight can affect immigration enforcement, detention, removals, and civil liberties across the United States.
Debates over ICE reform have been ongoing for years, with proposals ranging from statutory limits on civil enforcement and detention to new oversight, transparency, or due-process protections. Reforms can arise through federal legislation, binding departmental regulations, or court-ordered changes that produce binding remedies, and their prospects depend on the 2025–2026 political landscape, congressional majorities, and executive-branch priorities.
Market odds reflect the aggregated expectations of traders about which specific reform outcomes will be enacted under the market’s rules; they are dynamic and update as events unfold. Use the market prices as a real-time signal of perceived likelihood and the marketplace’s view of timing and political feasibility, not as definitive predictions.
This market typically treats reforms that create binding, enforceable change: federal statutes signed into law and final federal regulations promulgated under Administrative Procedure Act procedures. Nonbinding internal memos, agency guidance, or purely prospective proposals usually do not qualify unless the market’s specific outcome rules say otherwise.
‘In 2026’ refers to actions with final, legally operative dates falling within the 2026 calendar year — for statutes, the date of enactment (signature or veto override); for regulations, the final rule’s effective date if specified by the market rules. Check the market page for any narrower timing definitions or exceptions.
A law that is duly enacted (signed or enacted over a veto) is considered enacted even if later enjoined; however, whether a court order that prevents implementation negates the market’s qualification depends on the market’s exact outcome rules. Traders should consult the event’s outcome definitions to see how post-enactment judicial actions are treated.
Yes — final, binding federal regulations issued by DHS/ICE that change enforcement authorities, detention standards, or operational procedures can qualify if the market’s rules include regulations as valid outcomes. Nonbinding policy statements or interim guidance typically do not qualify unless finalized through APA rulemaking.
Key actors include the President, DHS Secretary, ICE leadership, House and Senate leaders and committees with immigration or appropriations jurisdiction, and advocacy groups. Influential vehicles are standalone immigration bills, appropriations or DHS authorization language, and large omnibus spending or border-security packages where reforms can be attached.