After labeling transfers to Guantánamo as ‘fake news,' Trump deports Haitians from there
Only days after Trump administration officials denied plans to transfer undocumented migrants to an American naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, before deporting them, a U.S. military plane flew 20 Haitians from the military installation to Port-au-Prince on Tuesday.
While 11 of the migrants who landed back in Haiti's gang-controlled capital had been picked up at sea near The Bahamas while reportedly en route to Florida, nine others had been transferred to Guantánamo from Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention in the United States, two sources told the Miami Herald.
'Some said they had been in two [detention] facilities in a week,' a Haitian official told the Miami Herald after confirming the U.S. military flight's quiet arrival in the Caribbean nation.
The aircraft landed at 12:05 p.m. Tuesday at Toussaint Louverture International Airport in Haiti's capital, where armed gangs control most of the roads in the surrounding area and the metropolitan area was plunged into blackout hours later after the main Péligre hydroelectric power plant was forced to shut down by protests. Deemed too dangerous for U.S. citizens, the airport has been off limits to U.S. commercial and cargo flights since November, when gangs opened fire on Spirit Airlines and also hit JetBlue Airways and American Airlines with bullets, forcing the Federal Aviation Administration to issue an ongoing ban.
The Trump administration has scheduled the repatriation of another 61 Haitians back to the country on Wednesday. That flight is going to land in Cap-Haïtien, according to a source with knowledge of the plans.
With the only international airport accessible to the outside world, Cap-Haïtien has received an average of one U.S. deportation flight a month. Tens of thousands of Haitians have also been deported home from the neighboring Dominican Republic.
The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to Miami Herald questions about why the Haitian migrants were transferred from the United States to the naval base in Cuba.
Last week, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt labeled reports that the administration planned to send thousands of migrants, including nationals from Western European countries, to the controversial detention facility at Guantánamo Bay as 'fake news.'
'Not happening,' Leavitt posted on X.
Guantánamo Bay, which has a prison for suspected terrorists tied to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, has long had a facility to house migrants, mostly Cubans and Haitians picked up at sea while their asylum claims are heard or they are resettled in a third country. But one of President Donald Trump's first official acts upon returning to the White House earlier this year was ordering officials to prepare Guantánamo to hold as many as 30,000 migrants.
Trump's directive marked a dramatic expansion of the facility's use for immigration enforcement as part of his mass deportation campaign. In February, the administration sent more than 150 Venezuelans to Guantánamo before deporting them back to their home country. At the time, advocates and lawyers raised alarms that jailing them there was inhumane and violated the immigrants' constitutional rights.
The following month, an undisclosed number of migrants at the facility were then transferred to a detention center in Louisiana.
In recent weeks, top White House adviser Stephen Miller has put pressure on immigration officials to ramp up immigrant detentions to 3,000 a day —a goal that is likely to overcrowd already full detention centers.
Guerline Jozef, executive director of the San Diego-based Haitian Bridge Alliance, said the transfer of Haitian nationals to Guantánamo Bay was 'covert' and their deportation from the base 'is not just a humanitarian crisis. It is a flagrant violation of international human rights and civil liberties.
'Guantánamo is a black site designed for secrecy and exclusion. Haitian immigrants—and asylum seekers—are once again being subjected to the same cruel, barbaric and inhumane treatment they were subjected in the 1990s, held without access to counsel, without notice to their families or legal advocates and deported under the cover of darkness,' Jozef said. 'These individuals have been stripped of their most basic rights under U.S. and international law.'
Jozef, who lobbied against such a plan during the Biden administration and denounced the Trump administration's directive in January, said she and other advocates 'are deeply familiar with Guantánamo protocols. This is not how immigration detention is supposed to work. The decision to disappear Haitians and others into this military pipeline reveals the racialized logic of U.S. immigration enforcement. We cannot allow a system built for indefinite detention and torture to become the new front line of migrant removal. This is a human rights emergency and a moral disgrace.'
For Haitians, the infamous military base in Cuba has a troubled history. About 34,000 Haitians were detained at the base in the early 1990s after the Haitian military led a coup against the country's democratically elected president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. The Haitians were detained at sea by the U.S. Coast Guard while trying to reach Florida in makeshift boats. At the base, they were held behind barbed wire fencing where, along with similarly detained Cuban refugees, they were subjected to inhumane conditions.
The base was finally ordered closed in 1993 after a federal court ruling found that the government had unlawfully held migrants at the offshore detention center. Despite the court order, the U.S. maintained its right to hold refugees at the base and has long operated a migrant facility there where individuals picked up at sea and who claim fear of persecution in their home countries are taken for interviews.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
7 minutes ago
- Fox News
Wife of Boulder firebombing suspect begs Americans for help while judge delays deportation
The wife of accused Boulder, Colorado attacker and illegal Egyptian national Mohamed Sabry Soliman released her first public statement pleading for the American people's help after a Texas U.S. District Court judge on Wednesday ruled the family will be allowed to remain in the country pending deportation efforts. Soliman, 45, is accused of injuring more than a dozen people after throwing Molotov cocktails into a crowd of peaceful pro-Israel demonstrators, while yelling, "Free Palestine." Following the attack, federal authorities detained Soliman's wife, Hayem El Gamal, and five children, who lived about two hours away in Colorado Springs. A Colorado judge ruled last week that since El Gamal and the children were removed by federal officials and sent to Texas, any judicial relief had to come from a judge with jurisdiction. U.S. District Court Judge Orlando Garcia, in San Antonio, issued a 14-day extension of the previously issued order prohibiting the family's deportation. Following Garcia's decision, El Gamal, through an attorney, released her first public statement regarding the case. "My five children and I are in total shock over what they sa[w] my husband d[o] in Boulder, Colorado earlier this month," El Gamal wrote. "So many lives were ruined on that day. There is never an excuse for hurting innocent people. We have been cooperating with the authorities, who are trying their best to get to the bottom of this. We send our love to the many families who are suffering as a result of the attack." She explained the aftermath of the attack from her perspective, detailing a late-night flight and stay at an immigration jail in Texas. "This includes my two four-year-old children, my seven-year-old, my fifteen-year-old, and my oldest daughter, who just turned eighteen in jail," she wrote. "We are grieving, and we are suffering. We are treated like animals by the officers, who told us we are being punished for what my husband is accused of doing. But why punish me? Why punish my four-year-old children? Why punish any of us, who did nothing wrong?" Since coming to America three years ago, El Gamal claimed the family "tried to do everything right," obtaining work permits, learning English and teaching the U.S.'s official language to other immigrants. "We have always tried to be good neighbors, cooking food for those around us regardless of whether they are Muslim, Christian or Jewish," she wrote. "I do not judge anyone based on his religion. If your heart is good, that's enough." The reference to neighbors practicing other religions comes weeks after Fox News Digital interviewed an observant Jewish family who recently moved into the same neighborhood as the suspect's family. In the days following the attack, David and Rivkah Costello described the horror of finding out that their neighbor had been charged in connection to the alleged hate crime. As the couple unpacked boxes, they said El Gamal showed up at their door, adorned with a mezuzah, offering cupcakes to welcome them to the neighborhood. "All I want is to give my children good lives," El Gamal continued in statement. "My oldest daughter volunteered at a hospital; she has a 4.5 GPA and wants to become a doctor, to help people in this country. My kids want to go to school, they want to see their friends and deal with their grief from recent weeks. But here they can't sleep. They cry throughout the day, asking me, 'When will we get to go home?'" She claimed when they were first detained, her children were "forced" to watch officials "rough-up" another detainee, adding they lacked privacy and decent meals. "Only mothers can truly understand what we are going through," El Gamal wrote. "I did everything for my kids. It has been two weeks in jail, how much longer will we be here for something we didn't do? How much longer until the damage to my children is irreversible? It has been so hard for me to stay strong for my kids. I'm so tired. I ask the American people, with all my heart, to please listen to our story and help us."


UPI
8 minutes ago
- UPI
Trump administration ending LGBTQ suicide hotline in July
Supporters of the LGBTQ community march to the U.S. Capitol on June 8. A specialized suicide lifeline for the LGBTQ community is ending on July 17. Photo by Leigh Vogel/UPI | License Photo June 18 (UPI) -- The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline no longer will offer a specialized service for LGBTQ callers as of July 17. The Trump administration issued a stop-work order to the non-profit Trevor Project, which has operated the specialized 988 LGBTQ suicide lifeline since 2022, the New York Times reported. Officials with the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration confirmed the stop-work order calls for the hotline to cease operation on July 17. Suicide prevention services remain available, but there no longer will be a "Press 3 option" for LGBTQ callers. "Everyone who contacts the 988 Lifeline will continue to receive access to skilled, caring, culturally competent crisis counselors who can help with suicidal, substance misuse, or mental health crises or any other kind of emotional distress," SAMHSA officials said in a prepared statement. Trevor Project Chief Executive Officer Jaymes Black said the end of the specialized hotline is very bad for the LGBTQ community. "This is devastating, to say the least," Black told The Hill. "Suicide prevention is about people, not politics." He called the specialized hotline a "bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible." The LGBTQ suicide prevention service was established in 2022 to address the needs of respective callers, many of whom "experience distinct mental health issues," the New York Times reported. Such issues include discrimination and rejection by family members, which contributes to high suicide rates within the LGBTQ community. SAMHSA officials said the Press 3 service option received $29.7 million in federal funding for the 2023 fiscal year and $33 million for each of the 2024 and 2025 fiscal years. The specialized hotline's entire 2025 budget was spent as of June, and no more funding is coming, according to SAMHSA. The suicide prevention hotline will get the same $520 million in funding for the 2026 fiscal year as it did for 2025, Office of Management and Budget spokeswoman Rachel Cauley told NBC News. The budget won't "grant taxpayer money to a chat service where children are encouraged to embrace radical gender ideology by 'counselors' without consent or knowledge of their parents," Cauley said. The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline was established in 2005, and President Donald Trump in 2020 signed legislation establishing the specialized service for LGBTQ callers. The specialized service received about 1.3 million calls, texts and online chat messages since 2022, according to SAMHSA. It also received an average of 2,100 contacts every day in February.


USA Today
9 minutes ago
- USA Today
A divided Congress mulls war powers as Trump considers strike in Iran
A divided Congress mulls war powers as Trump considers strike in Iran Authorizing foreign wars is the job of U.S. lawmakers, but recent presidents have stretched their own powers to engage in global conflicts. Show Caption Hide Caption Trump teases possible strike on Iran but says it's not too late for deal "I may do it. I may not do it." President Trump teased a possible strike on Iran but also said it is not too late to negotiate. WASHINGTON – Lawmakers in the House and Senate are divided on how and whether to act on President Donald Trump's suggestion that he may authorize a U.S. strike on Iran amid missile attacks between Iran and Israel. Congress is the only branch of government that has the power to declare war, according to the U.S. Constitution, but presidents have stretched their own powers to engage in foreign conflicts in recent decades because the president can authorize strikes in defensive cases. As Israel and Iran trade blows in an escalating aerial war, Israel is aiming to take out Iran's nuclear facilities with the possibility of the U.S. military's help. Trump said on June 18 his decision is imminent and that he wasn't concerned about upsetting parts of his core MAGA political base that are publicly warning against the United States being entangled in another foreign conflict. Trump first ran for president in 2016 as an ardent critic of the war in Iraq. Once in the White House, he ordered a drone strike on an Iranian military commander, Qassem Soleimani, without telling Congress. Former President Barack Obama argued George W. Bush-era war authorizations from the early 2000s covered drone strikes in Yemen. And former President Bill Clinton conducted missile strikes in Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998 without explicit Congressional approval. Some lawmakers of both parties say they want a say in whether the U.S. gets involved in the conflict between Iran and Israel, which began on June 13 when Israel struck Iran. Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, and Ro Khanna, D-California, introduced a resolution to block U.S. involvement in the conflict without Congressional approval. "This is not our war," Massie wrote on X. "Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, introduced a similar measure in the Senate. Both the resolutions in the House and Senate are privileged, which means the chambers will be forced to vote on them as soon as next week, Kaine said. "It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States," Kaine said in a statement. "I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict." But support for the resolutions may not fall neatly along party lines. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, has said he will vote against Kaine's push because he wants to ensure Trump can destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities. And Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said the Constitution is "pretty clear" that the president can't take the country to war without Congressional approval. "You can't have a president just beginning a war on his own," Paul said. "So if that decision should be made, he should come to Congress and ask for permission." However, many Republicans in the Senate say Trump is well within his rights to move unilaterally for a single strike. "A single bombing run, historically, has not been understood to require congressional authorization," said Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. "To engage in sustained hostility, to engage in continued warfare, does require congressional coming to the floor.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, told CBS News on June 15 that "the worst possible outcome" would be the survival of the Iranian nuclear program. Destroying it through diplomacy would be preferred, he said. But "if diplomacy is not successful, and we left with the option of force, I would urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear program," he said. "If that means providing bombs, provide bombs... If it means flying with Israel, fly with Israel." Others are keeping their powder dry until Trump makes his plan clear. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, told reporters on June 17 that Trump is "perfectly within his right to do what he's done so far." Asked whether he would consider allowing a War Powers resolution to come to the floor to authorize force in the case it's needed, Thune said: "We're getting the cart ahead of the horse here." "Clearly if this thing were to extend for some period of time there could be a more fulsome discussion about what the role of Congress should be, and whether or not we need to take action," Thune said. "Right now, let's hope and pray for the best outcome, the best solution. In my view, that would be Iran coming to the negotiating table and agreeing to end their nuclear program."