Trump’s ICE Facility Surge Raises Transparency, Scrutiny Issues

The Trump administration’s rush to open new immigrant detention centers is unfolding with an unusual lack of transparency, as officials buy hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of property with little congressional oversight or paper trail.

The Department of Homeland Security has spent more than $500 million to buy at least a half-dozen warehouses for new detention centers in less than a year. Bloomberg News and others have reported the administration is eyeing about 20 sites in multiple states as it accelerates the Immigration and Customs Enforcement campaign to find, arrest and deport unauthorized immigrants.

Many of the purchases have stirred pushback from local officials and members of Congress who say they were given little notice or chance for feedback.

The transactions are occurring at a faster pace than normal government real estate acquisitions, and the agency hasn’t publicly released details on its plans.

Government real estate transactions are usually handled by the General Services Administration, and take several years to complete.

“If GSA wanted to go out and purchase 50 acres of land, Congress would generally put them through the ringer to find out whether it’s absolutely necessary,” and what other options are available, said a former GSA real estate official, who asked not to be identified to avoid repercussions at their current job.

Proposals for such purposes would normally go through the House and Senate committees for review and approval.

Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said he hadn’t seen a prospectus for any ICE detention centers.

“If I had seen a prospectus for this, my brain would have exploded,” Larsen said.

Last summer’s tax and spending bill funded the spending spree, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said. It gave the department $45 billion into 2029 to increase capacity for adults and families detained by ICE.

McLaughlin pointed to section 1231(g) of the US Code, which says that when its facilities are unavailable or agencies can’t rent suitable alternatives, the government can take money appropriated under “Immigration and Naturalization Service—Salaries and Expenses” to acquire land and build or remodel detention centers.

“Thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill, ICE has new funding to expand detention space to keep these criminals off American streets before they are removed for good from our communities,” she said.

The law wasn’t accompanied by the typical tables and directives that spell out lawmakers’ priorities.

“There’s no meaningful reporting requirements” for DHS’ use of the funding, said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Homeland Security subcommittee. The department in turn has given lawmakers “very little visibility” on how the money is being spent, he said.

Immigration activists echo that concern.

“There’s absolutely no transparency, even in a system notorious for its lack of transparency,” said Jennifer Ibañez Whitlock, senior policy counsel at the National Immigration Law Center.

‘A Crappy Process’

Some lawmakers—even in President Donald Trump’s party—have been pushing for more information on the plans to purchase properties in their districts.

In a Feb. 4 letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, Rep. Paul Gosar, an Arizona Republican, sought answers about an ICE detention center planned in Surprise, a town about 30 miles northwest of Phoenix. DHS paid about $70 million for a 418,000-square-foot facility.

Gosar’s letter said that he “strongly” supports ICE’s mission to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

Still, his list of 15 questions showed the lack of details shared publicly about the facility, including its timeline for operations, if it would be temporary or permanent, its traffic impact, security measures, and if there had been any effort to consult with local government entities or agencies.

“DHS has an obligation to work cooperatively with state and local officials,” Gosar wrote. He called for detention capacity to be implemented “with appropriate review and open communication” and congressional oversight.

He also asked how the facility would be funded if there’s a shortfall in future appropriations, and asked Noem to respond within 10 business days.

On Wednesday, Gosar told Bloomberg Government that he talked to DHS officials in a phone call, but had not yet received written answers.

“We haven’t had a good process,” Gosar said. “Right now, this is a crappy process.”

The city of Surprise said in a statement it “was not aware that there were efforts underway to purchase the building, was not notified of the transaction by any of the parties involved and has not been contacted by DHS or any federal agency about the intended use of the building.”

Three Democrats in the House and the Arizona attorney general, a Democrat, have also written to Noem seeking details on the Arizona facility.

Some counties have received a notification from ICE about planned warehouse purchases under a law requiring the government to assess the impact of its projects on historic sites.

In comparison, a GSA project to build and renovate DHS’s Washington headquarters included a 16-page prospectus detailing the scope of the work, the cost, and details on land acquired as part of the project. The Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Works and the House’s Transportation and Infrastructure Committee reviewed and approved the proposals in 2022.

A GSA spokesperson didn’t respond to questions about the warehouse purchases but said the agency is “following all lease procurement procedures in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.”

McLaughlin, the DHS official, said in an email that all the proposed detention center sites “will undergo community impact studies and a rigorous due diligence process to make sure there is no hardship on local utilities or infrastructure.” She also said ICE is “actively communicating” with Congress on facility expansion plans; her statement did not elaborate.

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said he succeeded in persuading Noem to cancel plans for a detention center in Marshall County.

“I relayed to her the opposition of local elected and zoning officials as well as economic development concerns,” Wicker posted on X. “I appreciate her for agreeing to look elsewhere.”

Other proposals have collapsed as scrutiny of ICE has grown—particularly after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis.

A Canadian developer reversed plans this month to sell ICE a warehouse in Hanover County, Va. And the Oklahoma City mayor said local opposition had scuttled ICE’s plans to purchase a site there for a detention facility.

Unusual path

An annual statistical report that ICE issued this month showed that through the first five months of the fiscal year, it used more than 200 facilities nationwide to hold detainees.

Only five of them were described as government-owned facilities staffed by a combination of federal and contract employees.

More commonly, ICE turns to private contractors or other government entities— such as the federal Bureau of Prisons and the US Marshals Service—when it needs more detention space. It also partners with state and local law enforcement.

Other DHS moves to acquire more detention capacity have left a paper trail in public contracting data, even when they’re not part of a competitive bidding process.

For example, the agency on Dec. 8 published a forecast of plans to acquire a minimum of two years of detention facility services with “up to 1,000+ detention beds” and transportation services with 400 miles of St. Paul, Minn. “due to the emergency declaration and uptick in operational tempo.”

The agency said in the forecast notice that its needs in Minnesota were too urgent to take the time to solicit bids.