Guantanamo Bay’s New Role: Why Trump’s Sending Deported Migrants To Be Imprisoned Alongside Terror Suspects

Barbed-wire fences, barren mountains, and withered palm trees define the stark landscape of Guantanamo Bay, a once-infamous site that had largely faded from the headlines — until now. The Trump administration has brought the detention facility back into the limelight by transporting migrants to the remote outpost aboard U.S. military aircraft. Over the past week, seven military flights have transferred at least 112 illegal migrants to the base, with plans to expand capacity significantly.“Trump is sending a signal to the world that if you violate our border and immigration laws, there will be severe consequences,” the managing director of strategic advocacy firm Nestpoint Associates, John Thomas, tells The New York Sun. “It fits in line with a deterrence strategy. It is also a prison that is qualified to handle the worst of the worst.”Commander of U.S. Southern Command, Admiral Alvin Holsey, told members of the Armed Services Committee that the facility could eventually hold up to 30,000 non-violent migrants, though only 2,500 beds are currently available. Among the detainees accused of rape and murder, United States officials have identified alleged members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang recently designated a foreign terrorist organization by President Trump, along with individuals suspected to have committed violent crimes.Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who visited Gito on February 7, said before she left that “dangerous criminal aliens” had been sent to the prison. She said that those on board one of the first flights from the U.S. included an immigrant who confessed to murder and another wanted in Venezuela for escaping jail and for aggravated robbery with a weapon and intent to commit homicide.A Legal and Political BattlegroundDetails, however, about the detainees and their crimes are scarce. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed that all migrants sent to Guantanamo have received final deportation orders, yet key legal documents and specifics on their alleged offenses have not been disclosed. More than half are defined as “high-risk” detainees and are being housed in the maximum-security prison. The remaining deportees are “low risk” and held in separate barrack-style facilities with restroom access. These detainees, according to federal guidelines, include individuals without criminal records who have been ordered deported for civil immigration violations, such as unlawful entry. This, too, has drawn condemnation, with critics contending that this violates the Trump administration’s pledge to expel the “worst of the worst.”The backlash doesn’t end there. On Wednesday, the ACLU and several immigration rights groups sued the Department of Homeland Security, arguing that detainees have been improperly denied access to legal representation. Civil rights advocates warn that the move turns Guantanamo into a murky legal zone where detainees can be held indefinitely without due process.“Non-citizens don’t have the same legal protections as citizens, but they do have some — though their rights are less defined,” Policy Director at Defense Priorities, Benjamin Friedman, tells the Sun. “For Trump, the appeal seems to be that, for 20 years, it’s been a place where the application of U.S. law is vague and unsettled. If the goal is to process them through the legal system, there are other ways to do that without using Gitmo.”Mr. Friedman contended, “Ideally, the U.S. would work with foreign governments to facilitate returns.”“If that’s not feasible, we could establish facilities in the U.S. rather than placing people in a legal gray zone,” he explained. “There are ways to house them — somewhere between a prison and a detention center — while ensuring humane treatment. The government has a responsibility to handle this in a reasonable way.”Despite the criticism, Trump allies have applauded the expansion, seeing it as a bold measure to enforce immigration laws with no exceptions. While officials initially claimed the base would house only the most brutal and the most violent, the inclusion of low-risk detainees underscores a broader message: no undocumented migrant is beyond the reach of detention and deportation — even those without criminal histories.The deportees are not being held alongside war on terror detainees who also reside at the installation.The New York Sun requested further comments from the Department of Defense, which referred the matter to the Department of Homeland Security, which did not immediately respond. Guantanamo’s Legacy: A Site of Endless ControversyThis is hardly the first firestorm to embroil the Cuba-based facility. Guantanamo Bay has long been a symbol of Washington’s detention policies, from holding migrants intercepted at sea in the 1990s to housing terrorism suspects after 9/11. For decades, Washington has used the base as a legal loophole, keeping detainees outside U.S. borders to limit their constitutional rights automatically applied when stepping on American soil. Almost 800 suspected terrorists have passed through the detention facility and just 15 remain. Still, it has proven impossible to close. “The unresolved question is what to do with the prisoners? These are the real terrorist leaders and ought not to be released,” former Lieutenant Colonel of the United States Army and author of “Inside Gitmo: The True Story Behind the Myths of Guantanamo Bay,” Gordon Cucullu, tells the Sun. “As it is, the Obama and Biden administrations already released far too many seriously dangerous individuals without real hope of supervision. Many have openly gone back to the fight.”When Obama took office, he quickly issued an executive order to close Guantanamo’s detention center within a year, arguing that its continued operation undermined U.S. credibility and fueled anti-American sentiment abroad. His efforts, however, were immediately met with resistance from Congress, which passed a series of bipartisan measures prohibiting the transfer of detainees to U.S. soil — even for trial. Lawmakers feared the political consequences of bringing terror suspects into the U.S., with opponents warning that their presence could pose security risks, even within maximum-security federal prisons.Another major challenge was the difficulty of resettling detainees in foreign countries. Many nations were reluctant to accept prisoners due to security concerns, diplomatic risks, or fears of public backlash. Even when countries agreed to take detainees, diplomatic negotiations were slow and fraught. Some detainees, despite being cleared for release, stayed in limbo because no country would accept them under conditions the U.S. deemed safe. The possibility that a former detainee might commit a terrorist act after release further complicated the situation, as no administration wanted to be responsible for such an outcome. Legal hurdles also played a role. Many detainees had been held for years without trial, and prosecuting them proved challenging due to the use of evidence obtained through certain harsh interrogation methods. In some cases, evidence was inadmissible in U.S. courts, making convictions difficult. Military tribunals at Guantanamo moved at a glacial pace, with cases stalled for years due to procedural battles and legal uncertainties. Even today, only one conviction has been finalized, and several detainees have been held for more than two decades without charges.The Biden administration faced similar obstacles. While President Biden pledged during his campaign to work toward closing Guantanamo, he took a more cautious approach than Mr. Obama, opting to quietly reduce the detainee population rather than push for an outright closure. “The military establishment has used political muscle to keep it open, and members of Congress have fought to block additional funding that would be required to shut it down. Also, Congress has fought against the legal ability to transfer high-risk prisoners to lesser facilities,” Mr. Thomas explained. “Bottom line, the political will has not been large enough to force closure.”Now, rather than phasing out the base’s detention role, the Trump administration is expanding it, using the same offshore legal gray area to hold migrants instead of terror suspects, raising the possibility that the naval base will become a permanent extension of U.S. immigration enforcement.The Costliest Detention Facility on EarthSuch a policy comes with a hefty price tag.The Trump administration’s decision to house migrants at Guantanamo Bay has also reignited legal and financial concerns over the use of the military base, already infamous for its exorbitant costs. Lawmakers have questioned the price of detaining individuals offshore, with little transparency on the full financial burden. Guantanamo’s annual operating costs are over $540 million, making it the most expensive detention facility in the world. Each detainee costs taxpayers roughly $13 million per year, while roundtrip government-chartered flights, often carrying only a handful of passengers, cost $6.5 million annually.The facility remains a logistical and financial drain. Hundreds of generators, air conditioners, and dehumidifiers struggle to combat the relentless Caribbean heat, mold, and wildlife, symbolizing the challenge of sustaining an American-style court system on foreign soil. Years of legal stagnation have only compounded the expense — at times, military court proceedings have racked up the equivalent expenditure of $700,000 per hour.Proponents of Mr. Trump’s executive order, however, say the expense is one that is worth it. “I would not be concerned with the comparatively small amount of funding required to keep a US presence at Gitmo,” Mr. Cucullu said. “It is a prime strategic location and serves a vital interest in protecting the region.”Over 700 military personnel are now involved in the latest operation to house migrants as officials weigh the cost and logistics of expanding what could become a sprawling offshore detention site. It could even see more funds directed its way. “President Trump won’t be seen being soft on the worst criminals of any kind,” Mr. Thomas said. “I could also see an increased funding for Guantanamo to expand the number of beds to deal with the increased demand.”For all its decades-long controversies, Guantanamo is only likely to grow. “The crisis at the border is one of the top, if not the No. 1, reason voters cast a ballot for President Trump. They expect him to throw every available resource, strategy and tactic to solve the crisis,” Mr. Thomas added. “Getting tougher on illegal immigration is part of Trump’s broader plan, and increasing penalties for illegals fits in with that deterrence plan.”

Guantanamo Bay’s New Role: Why Trump’s Sending Deported Migrants To Be Imprisoned Alongside Terror Suspects

More from the New York Sun

Alyssa Thomas Reveals Death Threats Amid Sinister Turn in Caitlin Clark ‘Targeting’ Drama

Catholic Arch-Conservatives Defy Pope Leo and Consecrate Bishops as Crisis Grows at Vatican

Outgoing Starmer Clashes With Conservatives Over Defense Spending Plan

More from the New York Sun

Alyssa Thomas Reveals Death Threats Amid Sinister Turn in Caitlin Clark ‘Targeting’ Drama

Catholic Arch-Conservatives Defy Pope Leo and Consecrate Bishops as Crisis Grows at Vatican

Outgoing Starmer Clashes With Conservatives Over Defense Spending Plan

Congressman Moves to Ban Pregnant Foreigners After Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship

Justice Department Reaches Settlement With Egg Producers To End ‘Unlawful Coordinated Manipulation’

House Conservatives Lock Up Chamber Floor in Protest Over SAVE America Act

German Intelligence Service Warning of Growing Threat From Extremists on Both Left and Right

Professor Reaches $1.9 Million Settlement After Being Fired Over Post About Charlie Kirk’s Assassination