SANTA FE, N.M. — The executive orders issued on President Donald Trump’s inauguration day and his commitment to mass deportations of “millions” are largely contingent on acquiring adequate funding for immigrant detention facilities.
The administration has yet to disclose the exact number of detention beds required or the associated costs to meet these objectives. Estimates indicate that approximately 11.7 million individuals are living in the United States undocumented, while Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) only has the budget to detain around 41,000 individuals at present.
To manage the influx of detainees as they undergo processing and deportation arrangements—often via air travel—the government will need to increase its capacity significantly. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) approximates that the daily cost for one adult detention bed is around $165.
One notable component of Trump’s strategy is the Laken Riley Act, a legislative measure that has passed through Congress, which would necessitate a staggering $26.9 billion investment to enhance the capacity of immigration detention facilities, thereby adding 110,000 beds according to a recent DHS memorandum.
This piece of legislation is named after a nursing student from Georgia whose tragic murder by a Venezuelan national last year energized Trump’s campaign. It mandates that immigration authorities detain individuals who are in the country illegally and have been accused of theft or violent crimes.
In an effort to curtail illegal entries, Trump is also mobilizing military forces at the southern U.S. border. His administration has utilized the Alien Enemies Act to tackle drug cartels, leveraging the rarely invoked 1798 statute that allows the president to deport non-citizens from countries that are in a state of declared war or under threat of invasion.
Additionally, Trump’s reduction of a practice known as “catch and release,” which allows certain migrants to stay in the U.S. while awaiting their immigration hearings, will further pressure the detention system by promoting detention and immediate deportation instead.
Currently, ICE manages the detention of immigrants across various facilities, including its own processing centers and privately run detention centers, alongside local jails under contracts with state and municipal governments. However, it operates no facilities specifically for the detention of families, who represent about one-third of those arriving at the southern U.S. border.
“There’s a limitation on the number of beds available to ICE,” said John Sandweg, who served as acting director of ICE during the Obama administration. “There are only so many local jails and private vendors with available beds. If the administration is aiming for a significant increase in detention capacity, that will necessitate the construction of new facilities.”
Trump’s assertion of a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border would utilize military assistance to bolster mass deportations and secure “appropriate detention space.” The Pentagon may also provide air transport support to DHS.
Private investors are anticipating a surge in construction, which has resulted in an increase in stock prices for major immigration detention providers, specifically Florida’s GEO Group and Tennessee’s CoreCivic.
Congress may utilize a fast-track budgeting approach called “reconciliation” to facilitate additional funding for detention as early as April. Concurrently, the Texas state land commissioner has put forth an offer of rural land near the border for the establishment of deportation facilities.
As for potential locations for additional ICE detention space, the American Civil Liberties Union has calculated that ICE is contemplating expanding its detention facilities across at least eight different states, including areas around Leavenworth, Kansas, and regions with high immigrant populations in New York City and San Francisco. This insight comes from Eunice Cho, a senior staff attorney with the organization.
The ACLU has sought access to communication from private detention centers after ICE reached out for feedback last year regarding future expansions. Correspondence hints at the possible reestablishment of a tent facility in Carrizo Springs, Texas, and the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, Texas, which are both related to previously detained immigrant children.
“Under this administration, the focus will be on detaining as many individuals as possible while substantially expanding detention capacity beyond what currently exists in the U.S.,” Cho explained.
Cho emphasized that Congress holds the financial keys to immigration detention infrastructure and that the Pentagon’s involvement as directed by Trump’s emergency declaration should raise questions.
“What impact does this have on our military’s readiness? Can the military truly provide suitable facilities for the detention of immigrants?” she questioned.
Concerns voiced by immigrant rights advocates point to the dangers of establishing a hyper-militarized police state, which could lead to an unprecedented expansion of the largest immigrant detention system globally. Reports from a Department of Homeland Security inspector general indicate that ICE’s detention facilities have faced consistent challenges in meeting federal care standards, impacting the well-being of both detainees and staff during inspections conducted from 2020 to 2023.
During Trump’s initial term, he sanctioned the use of military bases for detaining immigrant children, including installations like Fort Bliss in Texas and Goodfellow Air Force Base. This approach mirrored actions taken by the Obama administration in 2014, which temporarily housed immigrant children on military bases while increasing the capacity of privately managed family detention centers to accommodate numerous Central American families caught crossing the border.
Furthermore, U.S. military bases have historically served as shelters for waves of immigrants escaping conflicts from countries like Vietnam, Cuba, Haiti, Kosovo, and Afghanistan since the 1970s.
