GAO Finds ICE Wasted Millions Expanding Detention Capacity
Left 0%
Center 100%
Right 0%
0 left · 2 center · 0 right
What happened
The Government Accountability Office released a report finding that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement wasted millions of taxpayer dollars in a rapid push to expand detention capacity after receiving large new appropriations, including funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. ICE spent about $1.07 billion to buy 11 warehouses it planned to convert into detention centers, then said it would sell seven of them, leaving unrecoverable purchase costs and ongoing utilities and security bills; no detainees have been held in the warehouses. The agency also used escrowed funds via Chicago Title Insurance to buy detention facilities from CoreCivic, paid Florida well above ICE’s typical per-bed rate for state-run sites including the facility known as Alligator Alcatraz, and spent millions on unused meals at an El Paso-area site and unused tents at Guantanamo Bay. GAO said ICE lacked a comprehensive strategic plan and had not fully accounted for operating costs after current funding runs out. ICE agreed to produce a plan but projected completion by Aug. 31, 2027, a date GAO said may not be soon enough given the risk of further waste.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 3 articles
3 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 3 of 3
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Government Accountability Office and Heather MacLeod
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 3 of 3
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: official report, GAO report
- Credits another outlet 0 of 3
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 3
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Sep 25, 00:00 UTC by New York Times, naming its source. First document in the first report, from New York Times (official report).
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
ONE-SIDED THIS WEEK.
Only left-leaning outlets have covered this story in the last two days;
Washington Examiner reported it on 2026-09-15.
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Right-leaning outlets had not covered this as of publication, so they neither confirm nor contest the waste finding. Left-leaning coverage reports that the Government Accountability Office said the Trump administration squandered millions of dollars to expand detention. A reader of the silent side would not know ICE bought warehouses it later decided to sell, paid for unused meals at a military-base site, and still lacks a long-term plan for detention costs.
Left-leaning coverage leads with "Unused Tents and Uneaten Food." That headline puts unused gear first, while the same review also found ICE paid a premium for warehouses, bought private-prison sites it still pays a contractor to operate, and reimbursed Florida well above its typical per-bed rate.
How much money, in total, did the detention expansion waste?
Bottom line
The New York Times reported that the GAO found millions wasted on ICE's detention expansion; right-leaning outlets have not reported the finding.
The receipts — 6 facts one side's coverage lacks
- A GAO report found millions of dollars wasted in ICE's push to expand detention
- ICE used $1.07 billion to purchase 11 warehouses, seven of which it now plans to sell
- ICE lost $20 million in unrecoverable costs on warehouses it no longer plans to use
- $1.55 billion still sits with Chicago Title Insurance for acquiring detention centers
- ICE spent $7.1 million on unneeded detainee meals
- ICE said it would produce a strategic plan by Aug. 31, 2027, a date GAO said was not soon enough
The Left View
Left-leaning and center outlets that covered the report treated it as documented waste in a rushed detention buildup. The New York Times led on unused tents and uneaten food and described the Trump administration as having squandered millions to expand detention. CBS News and Axios reported the same GAO conclusions with more spending detail: ICE received more than $75 billion to expand operations, including $45 billion tied to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act; advanced large sums through Chicago Title; paid an 11–13% premium on the warehouses after a 30-day purchase push associated with Kristi Noem; later abandoned most of that warehouse plan; then spent more than $2 billion buying CoreCivic facilities it still pays the company to operate. Those outlets cited GAO and related records on roughly $20 million in sunk warehouse-related costs, $7.1 million in unneeded meals, $2.85 million in unused Guantanamo tents, Florida bed rates far above ICE’s median, and $608.4 million in FEMA-related payments for Alligator Alcatraz. Coverage emphasized bypassed contracting practices, missing long-term cost forecasts, a 71% rise in the detained population, and GAO’s view that waiting until 2027 for a strategic plan is too slow.
Our Take (balanced)
The story is substantive: it is anchored in a named GAO report, federal spending records, identified facilities and contractors (Chicago Title, CoreCivic, Florida sites, Guantanamo Bay, El Paso/Fort Bliss), and specific dollar figures rather than a single party’s uncorroborated claim. Established is that GAO found ICE wasted funds on scaled-back or unused detention initiatives, did not analyze long-term affordability beyond about three years, and that DHS agreed a comprehensive plan is needed; ICE’s own timeline for that plan is August 2027. GAO did not publish a single total for all potential waste, and some comparisons (premiums, per-bed rates) come from the watchdog, real-estate data, or prior reviews and remain the report’s findings, not court judgments. A DHS inspector general audit of whether acquisitions were cost-effective is still underway. No right-leaning outlet has reported this. Watch next for that IG audit, actual sale prices if the unused warehouses are sold, ICE’s spending against the remaining escrowed funds, and any fuller DHS or ICE response beyond the existing claim that it is expanding detention at “turbo speed.”
3 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.