

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Hundreds denied due process and held in abusive conditions as administration plans to send thousands more to infamous prison site.
Civil rights groups today filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking information on the Trump Administration’s detention of immigrants at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The move comes after the administration sent approximately 500 noncitizens to Guantánamo without due process and amid reports that it plans to detain thousands more there. Despite attempting to expand this notorious prison camp – associated at its core with torture and lawlessness – the administration is continuing to operate in secrecy about who they are sending there and why, as well as the likely terrible conditions for individuals detained there.
“We know from over 30 years of challenging unlawful detentions in Guantánamo, that the government has always attempted to shield its operations there from the law and public scrutiny, which has produced a legacy of torture, suffering, and systemic human rights violations,” said Ayla Kadah, Staff Attorney and Justice Fellow at the Center for Constitutional Rights. “That the Trump administration is openly embracing this very symbol of lawlessness and brutality – while refusing to provide any information about conditions or their legal authority – leads us to fear the worst of Guantánamo is happening again. We will continue our decades-long fight for accountability and to finally shutter this dark island prison.”
On January 29th, Trump issued an executive order to expand to “full capacity” the Guantánamo Migrant Operations Center (GMOC), a detention facility located on the naval base along with the infamous island prison where, in the name of fighting terrorism, the Bush administration detained and tortured hundreds of Muslim men and boys after 9/11. The Trump administration has denied immigrants at Guantánamo meaningful access to attorneys and the ability to challenge their detention. Those who have been detained there report brutal conditions: solitary confinement in windowless cells for at least 23 hours a day, invasive strip searches, extreme temperatures, a lack of food and medical care, and long hours in a “punishment chair,” all of which have led to several suicide attempts.
Brought by the Haitian Bridge Alliance, Detention Watch Network, and the Center for Constitutional Rights, the suit follows the administration’s failure to comply with the groups’ February FOIA request. The suit seeks information on, among other subjects, the claimed legal basis for detaining immigrants at Guantánamo, the criteria for sending them there, their identities, whether they face interrogation and, if so, by whom and for what purpose, which agency or agencies have custody over them, and the roles of each agency – whether, for example, the Defense Department is involved in civilian law enforcement.
Said Setareh Ghandehari, Advocacy Director of Detention Watch Network, “Guantánamo Bay’s abusive history speaks for itself. The Trump administration’s plans to massively expand ICE detention at Guantánamo jeopardizes the mental and physical health of immigrants, separates families, and upends communities across the United States.The intentional withholding of information about these plans, paired with ICE’s culture of secrecy, is yet another hallmark of an authoritarian regime. The result of Trump's cruel mass detention and deportation agenda so far is an exacerbation of inhumane conditions in ICE detention, with increasing reports of death, medical neglect, overcrowding, lack of food, and rampant transfers that cut people off from their loved ones and support networks. Detention in remote locations, like Guantánamo, amplifies these harms. Communities across the country are watching daily as their family members, friends, coworkers, and neighbors are being violently targeted and disappeared by ICE. Transparency into Trump's plans at Guantánamo is critical for oversight and accountability.”
Historically, the U.S. government has detained people at Guantánamo to try to evade the law, and, after 9/11, it became a site and symbol of torture and other human rights abuses. But litigation by the Center of Constitutional Rights yielded a 2008 Supreme Court ruling that people held at Guantanamo have the constitutional right to challenge their detention. At the same time, sporadic efforts by the Bush, Obama, and Biden administrations, spurred by years of political and legal advocacy, had reduced the population of the “war on terror” prison to only 15. The Trump administration is breaking with these trends, detaining a large number of people at Guantánamo while denying them basic legal and human rights. This also marks the first time that the government has transferred people there from the territorial United States.
“The U.S. government has used Guantánamo as a key piece in its prevention through deterrence migration strategy for decades,” said Erik Crew, Staff Attorney with Haitian Bridge Alliance, “where the goal is to punish certain migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers who attempt to seek internationally-mandated humanitarian protection in the United States. Detention at Guantánamo is valuable to the U.S. government because it continues to use it as a legal black hole where rights don’t apply. Civil society organizations like HBA and our partners will continue to fight against this lawlessness in U.S. and international human rights fora. We, the people of the U.S. and the people of the world, need transparency here, and we will fight for it.”
The suit seeks all relevant records from the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, the Department of State, and Citizenship and Immigration Services.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464"It seems we may be looking at a bona fide cover-up," said one reporter.
As it attempts to shield immigration agents from responsibility for killing Alex Pretti, the Trump administration is asking a court to dismiss an order preventing the destruction of evidence in the case.
Shortly after a gang of agents shot and killed the 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse in Minneapolis on Saturday, agents reportedly rounded up witnesses to the killing and transported them to the nearby Whipple Building, where they were detained for several hours, according to a review of court affidavits by CBS News.
Agents also ordered local police to leave the scene of the shooting, but the order was ignored by Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara, who instructed local officers to preserve the crime scene.
US District Judge Eric Tostrud swiftly issued an order barring federal agents from “destroying or altering evidence” related to the shooting, including evidence “removed from the scene” or “taken into [the federal government’s] exclusive custody.”
It came following a request from Drew Evans, the superintendent of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), who said his officers had been turned away by agents with the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The Trump administration has already preemptively declared that agents’ shooting of Pretti was justifiable, as it has done in at least 16 DHS shooting cases, according to an investigation published Tuesday by the Washington Post.
Members of the administration have stated that Pretti was a "domestic terrorist" and an "assassin" who intended to "massacre law enforcement," despite ample video evidence of the encounter leading to his death showing nothing of the sort.
On Monday, lawyers for the Department of Justice filed a legal motion, first reported on by the New York Times, opposing Tostrud's order preventing federal agencies from destroying evidence. The agencies, the DOJ argued, “are already obligated by agency policy to preserve the evidence at issue.”
"While it’s not uncommon for the Trump administration to oppose judges’ orders against it, this case seems particularly unnecessary—and suspicious," wrote Edith Olmsted in the New Republic.
Radley Balko, a journalist who covers criminal justice, pondered why the administration would need to oppose the motion at all if it was making no effort to destroy evidence.
"In a sane country, the DOJ response to a motion asking a judge to stop the government from destroying evidence after federal officers shot and killed a man in broad daylight would be, 'Of course, we wouldn't destroy evidence. We agree with this motion,'" he wrote on social media. "That is not what happened."
The motion comes as the administration is shielding many other pieces of information from the public, leaving the series of events to be pieced together through video footage shot by bystanders.
DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin has said multiple agents were recording body camera footage during the shooting, but has announced no plans to release it.
Meanwhile, the administration has refused to publicly name the agents involved in the shooting, with the recently sacked Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino asserting that publicizing their names was tantamount to "doxing."
"Clearly, DHS is taking unprecedented actions to control the investigation into the second broad daylight killing of a civilian by its agents in just the past month," Olmsted wrote. "When coupled with Customs and Border Patrol’s efforts to shield its officers from accountability, and Trump officials’ desperation to change the subject, it seems we may be looking at a bona fide cover-up."
"She needs to be fired, resign, or she will be impeached."
President Donald Trump offered a one-word answer—"No"—when asked Tuesday if Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem will resign following her decision to smear Alex Pretti as a violent domestic terrorist immediately after he was gunned down by border security agents on a Minneapolis street, but Democrats in Congress noted that many in the Republican Party have not appeared so confident regarding Noem's conduct following the killing.
Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee emphasized that since "Operation Metro Surge" in the Minneapolis area led to the killing of a second US citizen by Border Patrol agents on Saturday, and Noem accused Pretti of approaching officers with a gun and resorting to violence despite the fact that footage from multiple camera angles showed nothing of the sort, "she has been rebuked by Republicans in Congress, by her own senior staffers, and even the president."
Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) said Noem's comments "came before all the facts were known and weakened confidence," while Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) called for Noem and the heads of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other immigration agencies to testify before Congress.
Former DHS general counsel John Mitnick, an architect of the agency, said he was "enraged and embarrassed by DHS’s lawlessness, fascism, and cruelty" and demanded Trump's impeachment, and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt attempted on Monday to distance the administration from Noem's response to the killing.
The Democrats on the Homeland Security Committee posted MS NOW's fact-check of Noem's comments directly after Pretti was killed, along with their demand: "She lied about Alex Pretti... She needs to be fired, resign, or she will be impeached."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) released a statement outlining why—regardless of how—Noem must leave her position leading DHS.
"Taxpayer dollars are being weaponized by the Trump administration to kill American citizens, brutalize communities, and violently target law-abiding immigrants," said the Democratic leaders. "Dramatic changes at the Department of Homeland Security are needed. Federal agents who have broken the law must be criminally prosecuted. The paramilitary tactics must cease and desist. Taxpayer dollars should be used to make life more affordable for Americans, not kill them in cold blood."
"Kristi Noem should be fired immediately, or we will commence impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives," they added. "We can do this the easy way or the hard way."
On MS NOW, Jeffries on Tuesday called Noem "a despicable, corrupt, pathological liar."
Hakeem Jeffries: "Kristi Noem is a despicable, corrupt, pathological liar. We've seen her slander not just one, but American citizens, patriotic Americans who were killed without justification on the streets of Minneapolis ... we are prepared to initiate impeachment proceedings… pic.twitter.com/MEnBXIJDdt
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 27, 2026
The GOP-controlled House is not likely to move forward with impeaching Noem, but a resolution to do so now has 150 Democratic cosponsors, with more than two-thirds of the party's House members backing the call to bring charges against the homeland security secretary and former South Dakota governor. Should Democrats win back control of the House in the November elections, they could move forward with the effort if she is still in office.
"Secretary Noem has blood on her hands," Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.) who introduced the impeachment articles, said in a statement. "Under her leadership, Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good were murdered."
"President Trump has repeatedly made clear his contempt for laws governing presidential transparency and proper recordkeeping."
A watchdog group is raising concerns that President Donald Trump may have violated federal recordkeeping laws by using an auto-deleting message application to text world leaders.
On Tuesday, the group American Oversight sent a letter to White House Counsel David Warrington asking for information about whether the president is taking all the required steps to comply with the Presidential Records Act, which requires the preservation of all presidential records—including digital correspondence—during official duties.
The group highlighted two posts Trump made on Truth Social last Tuesday in which appeared to reveal that he was using Signal or another similar messaging app to discuss world affairs with world leaders.
The first screenshot shows a message from French President Emmanuel Macron, who discussed plans to meet with Trump about his proposal to take over Greenland and meetings with other foreign diplomats.
The second was sent from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who told Trump he'd use his "media engagements" in Davos to "highlight" Trump's work in Ukraine and Gaza, and expressed an interest in "finding a way forward on Greenland."
While some European diplomats found it troubling that any intimate communication they have with Trump could be exposed to the world on a whim, American Oversight said it also raised concerns about the preservation of records.
Trump has a long history of flouting rules surrounding the proper storage of documents. The group pointed out that during his first term, the president would often rip up notes, memos, and documents after reading them and at least twice reportedly attempted to flush them down the toilet.
More recently, he was indicted for improperly stashing away classified documents at his personal residence at Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House and showing them to people without security clearances.
The second Trump White House has already been involved in a scandal surrounding their use of deleting message apps when a journalist was accidentally invited into a private Signal chat last year, which contained the administration's plans for an imminent strike on Yemen. The messages in that chat were reportedly set to delete after one week, before later being changed to four, which would have also violated the Presidential Records Act.
“President Trump has repeatedly made clear his contempt for laws governing presidential transparency and proper recordkeeping,” said American Oversight executive director Chioma Chukwu. “The Presidential Records Act exists to ensure transparency of presidential decisions and safeguard the historical record for the American people."
"Given President Trump’s well-documented history of mishandling sensitive information and presidential records," he added, "the White House must assure the public that these communications are secure and being preserved and protected in full compliance with the law.”
The group has requested that the White House counsel disclose any other messages Trump may have sent using auto-deleting apps and ensure that any messages sent through mobile messaging programs are properly preserved.