The Weaponization of Migrant Detention for Private Profits

Guest blogger: law student, University of San Francisco

The United States may detain and deport noncitizens who participate in criminal acts, are a threat to public safety or violate their visa.[1] Generally, deportation proceedings should involve access to a fair hearing, humane detention during initial proceedings, and safe removal to a country where they will not face torture or persecution. However, the weaponization of detention in immigration cases routinely violates the constitutional and human rights of migrants for the perpetuation of federal rhetoric and profit of private corporations. 

Rights of Non-Citizens:

The Federal government has plenary power over immigration and therefore determines which rights non-citizens possess.[2] In the United States, the supreme court has reaffirmed that noncitizens have due process rights (fifth and fourteenth amendment rights) as well as search and seizure rights (fourth amendment rights).[3] However, immigration cases do not have the right to counsel if they cannot afford it.[4] This is different from criminal proceedings, despite a common infringement on the right to liberty through detention.

Universal human rights also apply to all humans under international law. This includes the right to fair trial and freedom from torture or cruel, inhumane treatment.[5] Human Rights Watch has urged that countries should implement the least restrictive means necessary to accomplish legitimate government objectives.[6] This includes releasing migrants after the initial documentation period.[7] Human Rights Watch has published numerous articles about the various abuses of international law that migrants face while in detention, demanding that the federal government take action.[8]

            Additionally, there are National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention and Search that apply to CBP detentions. These standards assert that “every effort must be made to hold detainees for the least amount of time required for their processing, transfer, release or repatriation as appropriate and operationally feasible”.[9] These standards also address the conditions within the detention facilities such as temperature, hygiene, adequate food and water and access to medical care.[10]    

Current Conditions of Detention:

            Detention facilities often violate numerous rights and dehumanize migrants. Since November 2025, the average length of detention is 50 days. However, the Supreme Court has permitted holding up to 6 months to be presumptively reasonable (Zadvydas v. Davis), despite international law and TEDS urging for minimal detention times. [11]

Currently, 73% of those in detention for immigration related charges do not have a criminal conviction.[12] Since there is no right to a government provided attorney, 62% of detainees do not have access to legal advice regarding their rights or advocacy for release.[13] Those in detention without access to legal counsel are 3.6 times less likely to be successful at their individual hearing.[14] Detainees have also reported feeling pressure to sign documents that they do not understand, including documents that renounce their right to be reunified with their children before deportation.[15]  

            Beyond the due process violations, there are countless reports of human rights violations in detention. 90% of immigration related detainees are held in privately owned facilities, contracted out by CBP.[16] Reports often include complaints of frigid temperatures, unsanitary conditions, inadequate food and water, and no access to medical care.[17] Additionally, detainees suffer sleep deprivation, arbitrary solitary confinement and physical and sexual assault.[18] Based on a report from ICE detention centers in California, of 485 reports of grievances, only 39 were found in favor of the detainees. [19]  

Profits over People:  

            Human rights violations are able to persist because the government in collaboration with private companies prioritize profits over people. The outcome of the Flores settlement has led to the Child Welfare League of America continually determining that CBP and ICE are failing to meet the standards set to ensure human rights are upheld in detention centers. [20] The overwhelming number of complaints in conjunction with civil society reports and pending court cases gives the federal government sufficient notice of the systematic problem with the mandatory detention facilities.

            The current Trump Administration favours mass detentions because it progresses the narrative that immigration is an issue in the United States, and justifies further funding into mass deportations. Keeping migrants in detention creates an association that they are criminals and perpetuates the narrative that “illegal immigrants are committing vile and heinous acts against innocent Americans.”[21]  The dehumanization of migrants through the detention system is key to the administration maintaining support for the expensive and ever-expanding harsh immigration policies.

            The private contractors also profit significantly from prolonged detention in inadequate facilities. Individual’s corporations receive $142 a day per individual detained by ICE.[22] The One Big Beautiful Bill Act allocates $45 billion dollars to expand immigration detention, incentivizing private companies to detain more migrants for longer times.[23] The money given to these companies is not allocated to improve conditions in any way, but incentivizes overcrowding of already inadequate facilities. Human rights will continue to be violated, while private companies profit from the mass detention of noncitizens.  

Humane Alternatives to Detention:

            The United States government claims the purpose of mandatory detention is to 1. ensure individuals are present for their hearings and 2. Protect the community.[24] The federal government has admitted that detention does not deter migration nor does it ensure court appearances.[25] Human Rights Watch encourages the use of case management programs instead of mandatory detention. This would entail a community-centric case management program that provides individuals with a holistic approach to their immigration case, including legal services, housing rights, employment and other basic necessities. Those enrolled in these forms of programs in other countries have attended their own hearings voluntarily 86% of the time.[26]  This would not only encourage the protection of human rights but would be less expensive for the federal government as well (the 2017 Family Case Management Program cost $38 per individual before its termination).

Conclusion:

            The weaponization of detention has permitted the government and private companies to profit on the dehumanization of migrants. Detention facilities for immigration related cases are inhumane and costly to the government budget. The United States government must prioritize legal obligations to uphold non-citizen and human rights, instead of prioritizing federal rhetoric and private company profits.

[1] https://www.usa.gov/deportation-process

[2] Article I Section 8 Clause 18 of the Immigration Plenary Power Doctrine

[3] Zadvydas v. Davis, United States Supreme Court (2001). Also see: United States v. Brigononi-Ponce, United States Supreme Court (1975).

[4] Aliens and Nationality Act, Chapter 12 Section 1362. Right to Counsel.

[5] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 7 and Article 9(3).

[6] https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/11/03/dismantling-detention/international-alternatives-detaining-immigrants

[7] Id.

[8] https://www.hrw.org/report/2025/07/21/you-feel-like-your-life-is-over/abusive-practices-at-three-florida-immigration

[9] https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/immigration-detention-united-states-agency/

[10] Id.

[11] https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/trump-immigrant-detention

[12] https://tracreports.org/immigration/quickfacts/

[13] https://www.vera.org/news/the-truth-about-immigration-detention-in-the-united-states

[14] https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/immigration-detention-united-states-agency/

[15] Id.

[16] https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/immigration-detention-united-states-agencym

[17] Id.

[18] https://www.aclunc.org/news/californias-immigration-detention-facilities-plagued-human-rights-abuse-new-report-finds

[19] https://www.aclunc.org/news/californias-immigration-detention-facilities-plagued-human-rights-abuse-new-report-finds

[20] https://www.cwla.org/history-and-update-on-flores-settlement/

[21] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-american-people-against-invasion/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/canadian-detained-us-immigration-jasmine-mooney

[22] https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/11/03/dismantling-detention/international-alternatives-detaining-immigrants

[23] https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/big-beautiful-bill-immigration-border-security/

[24] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45915

[25] https://vera-institute.files.svdcdn.com/production/downloads/publications/operation_streamline-report.pdf

[26] Id.

bh