
‘We are in danger': Migrants deported from US were locked in hotel and held at remote camp in Panama, lawyers say
For days, they say they were locked inside a hotel in Panama, surrounded by tight security with limited contact with the outside world.
Nearly 300 migrants from Asia, all deported by the US, were held there by Panamanian authorities who agreed to take them in and eventually repatriate them. It's part of the Trump administration's mass deportation campaign, which it has pressured Latin American nations to help with.
Some migrants have been transferred to a remote camp at the edge of a jungle that few can access, lawyers representing some of the migrants told CNN. Now, they wait to learn if they will be sent back to the countries they fled or to another nation willing to receive them.
But the conditions they have faced are distressing and may have violated their rights, the lawyers said.
The migrants started arriving in Panama City last week after being deported from the US. Some didn't even know they were being flown to another country until they actually landed in Panama, according to attorney Ali Herischi, who said 'they were told they're going to Texas.'
The migrants were then sent to the Decapolis Hotel and forced to stay there for days without stepping foot outside.
Jenny Soto Fernández, a Panamanian lawyer who represents about 24 migrants from India and Iran, said her clients were living in isolation, fear and uncertainty.
She said a lot of them didn't know their rights and weren't given orders of removal upon being deported. They also face language barriers and are constantly worried about being repatriated, she added.
One of the migrants is Artemis Ghasemzadeh, an Iranian national who fled her country out of fear of persecution because of her conversion to Christianity.
'Under Islamic law, you cannot convert from Islam to any other religion,' said Herischi, who represents her.
Ghasemzadeh now worries her life will be at risk if she's returned to Iran.
'We are in danger,' she said in text messages to CNN on Tuesday. 'We are waiting for (a) miracle.'
At the hotel, some migrants tried to voice their concerns by sending distress signals to journalists gathered outside. Standing in front of their windows, they held up pieces of paper with handwritten notes begging for support.
'Please help us,' one sign read. 'We are not (safe) in our country.'
Another message was written with lipstick directly on the window. 'HELP US,' it read in bold, red letters.
The migrants were not allowed to leave the hotel 'for their own protection,' Panama's Security Minister Frank Ábrego told a local radio program on Wednesday. He said they were held at the hotel, in part, because officials needed to 'effectively verify who these people are who are arriving in our country.'
Soto argues that the migrants have the right to seek asylum because they're fleeing persecution.
'These people that are requesting refugee (status) — it's not because they want to come here on an adventure or a trip. No, they're escaping. They're victims of violence and persecution,' she told CNN.
Soto said she tried at least four times to meet her clients at the hotel to sign legal documents required by authorities but was blocked by officials and never made it past the lobby.
Soto sent CNN a video filmed by her clients, showing her waving to them from the hotel staircase below, trying to reach them to hand them the paperwork. But the clients were prevented from going down and Soto was told to leave.
'They actually were so emotional, screaming and said, 'I want my lawyer! I want her. I want to talk to her. I don't want to talk to these people here,'' Soto said.
Attorney Susana Sabalza told CNN she represents a family from Taiwan who was held at the hotel for five days without knowing what was happening.
She said that while they had comfortable beds and a place to stay, they were under 'psychological pressure being closed in with security guards, immigration police, (and) officers there.'
CNN has reached out to Panama's security ministry, as well as the International Organization for Migration (IOM), who are involved in the repatriation efforts.
Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino on Thursday denied that authorities have violated any laws.
'These organizations are respectful of human rights. It's false and I deny that we are mistreating them,' Mulino insisted.
Security Minister Ábrego said Wednesday that he hadn't heard of any migrants requesting asylum there.
'But if they think they have the need, as any human being would, to request asylum, we have to pay attention to it and approve or disapprove it,' he added.
CNN has reached out to Panama's National Office for Refugee Assistance to determine if anyone has filed an asylum claim.
The Panamanian government said that from Tuesday to Wednesday, about 97 migrants were taken out of the hotel and bused to a remote holding camp on the outskirts of the Darién Jungle. It happened after a New York Times report exposed the desperation of those stranded in the hotel in Panama City.
The miracle that Ghasemzadeh had hoped for didn't come. Hours after talking to CNN, she became one of those transferred to the camp. Her relatives said she learned late Tuesday night that she would be moved out of the hotel with about 12 other people, and that she didn't know where authorities would take her at the time.
Herischi, who represents Ghasemzadeh and nine other refugees, told CNN that his clients ended up being detained in a 'very bad' camp.
He said they described the site as tough and dirty, with limited access to medication and the internet.
One family has a sick child who could be heard crying in the background during a call between Herischi and Panamanian officials.
Sabalza said the family she represents was also taken to the camp.
'It's complicated because there are children five years old (and) it's a tropical place,' she told CNN.
She said Panamanian authorities had not yet provided them with guidelines on how the attorneys would be able to visit their clients at the camp or if they would need special permits to enter.
'It is urgent for us to have clarity about the mental and physical health status of our (clients),' she said.
When the migrants arrived at the gate on Wednesday morning, Herischi said the situation was so unorganized that the guards didn't even have a list of the migrants' names to identify them upon arrival. The guards later confiscated all the migrants' cell phones.
'It shows that (it's) such an unorganized and never-thought-of (situation,) and just ad hoc political decision to accept this, but they don't know what to do with them,' he told CNN.
He added that he plans to file legal action against Panama and the US in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and US federal court.
More than 100 migrants have asked not to be repatriated, Panamanian officials have said.
The IOM is expected to work with them and try to find a third country that will accept them, Security Minister Ábrego said.
Meanwhile, President Mulino said another group of migrants would be sent to the camp because 'that's where they can be more at ease.'
He added that 175 migrants who are still in the hotel have voluntarily agreed to return to their countries of origin. At least 13 have already been sent back.
Herischi said Panamanian authorities assured him they would not send Ghasemzadeh and other migrants back to Iran if they expressed fear of reprisals. Instead, officials said they would speak with the embassies of other countries to see if they can accept them.
Herischi concluded, 'The only 'luck' that they got is that Panama has no relationship with Iran, so there is no Iranian embassy there.'
'That's a good thing.'
Hashtags

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


Axios
19 minutes ago
- Axios
Amid backlash, Tesla remained resilient in Texas
Even as Tesla deliveries plunged nationally this year amid Elon Musk's very visible (if short-lived) alliance with President Trump, there was at least one state where Tesla registrations were up: Texas. Why it matters: The registration data, obtained by Axios through public information requests, indicates loyalty to the brand in its home base, including Texas' large urban and suburban counties. The depth of conservatives' enthusiasm for Musk's automobiles now faces a major test amid the absolute meltdown last week between the Tesla CEO and the president. By the numbers: Texans registered 12,918 new Teslas in the first three months of 2025, a period when Musk, who contributed more than $250 million to a pro-Trump super PAC during the 2024 election campaign, was enmeshed in the Trump administration as the overseer of DOGE, the president's cost-cutting initiative. Over the same period in 2024, Texans registered 10,679 Teslas. That's a 21% increase year over year. The intrigue: The spike in Texas registrations came as Tesla was flailing elsewhere. Tesla's vehicle deliveries plunged 13% globally in the first quarter of 2025 (336,681 electric vehicles) compared with Q1 2024 (386,810). Tesla vehicles were torched at showrooms and the brand's reputation cratered. Zoom in: Tesla saw year-over-year improvements in its sales in some of the most populous Texas counties. In Travis County, new Tesla registrations grew from 1,369 in the first quarter of 2024 to 1,424 during the first quarter of 2025. In Harris County, they grew from 1,526 to 1,837 during the same period. Tesla registration grew from 1,316 to 1,546 in Collin County and from 990 to 1,146 in Dallas County. In Bexar County, registrations grew from 631 to 664. What they're saying:"It's homegrown pride," is how Matt Holm, president and founder of the Tesla Owners Club of Austin, explains the car company's resilience to Axios. "And regardless of all the drama going on these days, people can differentiate between the product and everything else going on, and it's just a great product." "Elon has absolutely and irreversibly blown up bridges to some potential customers," says Alexander Edwards, president of California-based research firm Strategic Vision, which has long surveyed the motivations of car buyers. "People who bought Teslas for environmental friendliness, that's pretty much gone," Edwards tells Axios. Yes, but: The company had been enjoying an increasingly positive reputation among more conservative consumers. Musk was viewed favorably by 80% of Texas Republicans polled by the Texas Politics Project in April — and unfavorably by 83% of Democrats. In what now feels like a political lifetime ago, Trump himself even promoted Teslas by promising to buy one in support of Musk earlier this year. "In some pockets, like Austin, you have that tech group that loves what Tesla has to offer, can do some mental gymnastics about Musk, and looks at Rivian and says that's not what I want or might be priced out," Edwards says. Between the lines:"Being in the state of Texas, you're naturally conditioned to think you're better than everyone else in the U.S. And when you buy a Tesla" — a status symbol — "that's what you're saying. It doesn't surprise me that there's an increase in sales" in Texas, Edwards says. Plus: Tesla's resilience in Texas could have practical reasons as well, Edwards says. Texas homes — as opposed to, say, apartments in cities on the East Coast — are more likely to have a garage to charge a car in, he adds. What's next: Musk said late last month that Tesla was experiencing a "major rebound in demand" — without providing specifics. But that was before things went absolutely haywire with Trump and Tesla stock took a bath last week.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
California City Terminates 'Divisive' ICE Contract Amid L.A. Protests
Glendale, California, which is located just minutes from Los Angeles where anti-ICE protests erupted this weekend, has decided to end a contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold detainees in its jail. In a press release Sunday, city officials said that 'public perception of the ICE contract—no matter how limited or carefully managed, no matter the good—has become divisive.' 'And while opinions on this issue may vary—the decision to terminate this contract is not politically driven. It is rooted in what this City stands for—public safety, local accountability, and trust,' the statement said. Ahead of the unrest in Los Angeles, Glendale had come under some scrutiny over a 2007 contract to house ICE detainees despite a 2018 sanctuary state law ensuring that no local law enforcement resources are used for the purpose of immigration enforcement. In one year, the city collected $6,000 to house ICE detainees, and The Los Angeles Times reported that the city receives $85 per detainee per day. In the last week, two ICE detainees were held in Glendale's detention center, leading to an outcry over the city's potentially unlawful compliance, as the Trump administration has moved to increase the number of daily ICE arrests. But it seems that Glendale will no longer be complicit in the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. The statement continued, emphasizing that local law enforcement was not responsible for enforcing immigration law, and that the city would remain in compliance with the law. 'The Glendale Police Department has not engaged in immigration enforcement, nor will it do so moving forward,' the statement said. Just a few miles away in downtown Los Angeles, massive anti-ICE protests are still ongoing after immigration authorities arrested at least 44 immigrants Friday. In response to the protests, Donald Trump bypassed California Governor Gavin Newsom to deploy the National Guard, which has used tear gas, flash grenades, and rubber bullets against the protesters and journalists. The decision on behalf of Glendale is a victory for the protestors, and a clear response to the ongoing direct action in Los Angeles, as well as the Trump administration's escalating efforts to conduct mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's new travel ban: Which countries are on the list? Who's exempt? How are people reacting?
President Trump's sweeping new travel ban went into effect on Monday, barring citizens of 12 countries from visiting the United States and imposing restrictions on those from seven others. In a video message last week announcing the ban, Trump cited national security concerns, claiming that foreigners who were not properly vetted posed a terror risk. "We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen those who seek to enter the United States,' Trump said. The president also cited the recent attack in Boulder, Colo., by a man who allegedly shouted 'Free Palestine' and threw Molotov cocktails into a crowd of people calling for the release of Israeli hostages being held by Hamas. 'The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colo., has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas,' Trump said. 'We don't want them.' The suspect, identified as 45-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman, was arrested and charged with a hate crime. According to the Department of Homeland Security, Soliman is from Egypt and had overstayed a tourist visa. Egypt is not among the countries included in Trump's new travel ban. The ban, which went into effect Monday at 12:01 a.m. ET, prohibits foreign nationals from the following countries from entering the U.S.: Afghanistan Chad Republic of Congo Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Haiti Iran Libya Myanmar (Burma) Somalia Sudan Yemen It imposes partial restrictions on foreign nationals from the following countries: Burundi Cuba Laos Sierra Leone Togo Turkmenistan Venezuela There are numerous groups of people who are exempt from Trump's new travel ban. They include: Any lawful permanent resident of the United States. Dual citizens, or U.S. citizens who also have citizenship of one of the banned countries. Athletes and their coaches traveling to the U.S. for the World Cup, Olympics or other major sporting events determined by the U.S. secretary of state. Afghan Special Immigrant Visa holders who worked for the U.S. government or its allies during the war in Afghanistan. Children adopted by U.S. citizens. Diplomats and foreign government officials or representatives of international organizations and NATO on official visits. Foreign national employees of the U.S. government who have served abroad for at least 15 years, their spouses and children. Individuals with U.S. family members who apply for visas in connection to their spouses, children or parents. Iranians belonging to an ethnic or religious minority who are fleeing prosecution. Refugees who were granted asylum or admitted to the U.S. before the ban. Those traveling to the United Nations headquarters in New York solely on official business. The announcement angered humanitarian groups working to resettle refugees. 'President Trump's new travel ban is discriminatory, racist, and downright cruel,' Amnesty International USA said in a statement posted to X. 'By targeting people based on their nationality, this ban only spreads disinformation and hate.' "This policy is not about national security,' Abby Maxman, president of Oxfam America, said in a statement. 'It is about sowing division and vilifying communities that are seeking safety and opportunity in the United States." 'To include Afghanistan — a nation whose people stood alongside American service members for 20 years — is a moral disgrace,' Shawn VanDiver, president and board chairman of #AfghanEvac, said in a statement. 'It spits in the face of our allies, our veterans, and every value we claim to uphold.' The African Union Commission released a statement expressing concern about 'the potential negative impact' of the ban on educational exchange, commerce and engagement and the 'broader diplomatic relations that have been carefully nurtured over decades.' The commission said it 'respectfully calls upon the U.S. Administration to consider adopting a more consultative approach and to engage in constructive dialogue with the countries concerned.' The new travel ban is similar to the one Trump imposed in January 2017, his first month in office. That ban restricted travel to the U.S. by citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. (Syria and Iraq are not included on the new list.) It went into effect via an executive order with virtually no notice, causing chaos at airports nationwide and prompting numerous legal challenges. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a version of it in 2018. Stephen Vladeck, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, told the New York Times that the new ban is more likely to withstand legal scrutiny. 'They seem to have learned some lessons from the three different rounds of litigation we went through during the first Trump administration,' Vladeck said. 'But a lot will depend upon how it's actually enforced.'