
Florida lawmakers allowed into ‘Alligator Alcatraz' say detainees packed into cages
Two days after filing a lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for being 'unlawfully denied entry' to inspect conditions at the facility dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz,' members of Congress and state representatives were given a limited tour Saturday to inspect conditions after calling the lack of access a 'deliberate obstruction meant to hide what's really happening behind those gates,' according to a joint statement from lawmakers.
They said they heard detainees shouting for help and crying out 'libertad'— Spanish for 'freedom' — amid sweltering heat, bug infestations and meager meals.
'They are essentially packed into cages, wall-to-wall humans, 32 detainees per cage,' Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who represents Florida's 25th Congressional District, said during a news conference following their tour.
The families of some of the detainees have also decried conditions in the facility, while Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials defend it as offering higher detention standards than many US prisons.
On the tour, the lawmakers said they were not allowed to visit areas where migrants are currently being detained but instead were shown cells not yet being used.
Wasserman Schultz said each cage contained three small toilets with attached sinks, which detainees use for drinking water and brushing their teeth, sharing the same water used to flush the toilets.
When they toured the kitchen area, Wasserman Schultz said government employees were being offered large pieces of roast chicken and sausages, while the detainees' lunch consisted of a 'gray turkey and cheese sandwich, an apple and chips.'
'I don't see how that could possibly sustain them nutritionally or not make them hungry,' Wasserman Schultz said. 'And when you have hungry people, obviously their mood changes.'
Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost, who was also on the tour, said the lawmakers were concerned about reports of unhygienic conditions due to toilets not working and 'feces being spread everywhere,' but were denied access from viewing units where migrants are currently detained.
They were also not permitted to view the medical facilities, with officials citing HIPAA laws, despite lawmakers being allowed to examine the medical facilities at other detention facilities, he said.
'It is something everyone, whether you're Democrat, Republican or anything, should be deeply ashamed of,' Frost said. 'Immigrants don't poison the blood of this nation. They are the blood of this nation.'
US Rep. Darren Soto said lawmakers also witnessed evidence of flooding, highlighting serious concerns of what could happen to detainees if there's severe weather during what forecasters said may be a busy hurricane season.
'What we saw in our inspection today was a political stunt, dangerous and wasteful,' Soto said after the tour. 'One can't help but understand and conclude that this is a total cruel political stunt meant to have a spectacle of political theater and it's wasting taxpayer dollars and putting our ICE agents, our troops and ICE detainees in jeopardy.'
About 900 people are currently detained at the facility, Wasserman Schultz said during the news conference but it has the capacity to hold 3,000 people, with room for more, according to Kevin Guthrie, executive director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management.
The wife of a 43-year-old Guatemalan man currently detained at 'Alligator Alcatraz' told CNN her husband is enduring harsh conditions similar to those described by lawmakers who toured the facility. After more than two weeks in detention, she said, he has yet to see a lawyer.
'There are too many mosquitoes … He's in a really bad condition. The power goes off at times because they're using generators,' the woman told CNN in an interview Tuesday.
'The detainees are being held in tents, and it is very hot there. They're in bad conditions. … There's not enough food. Sick people are not getting medication. Every time I ask about his situation, he tells me it's bad,' she said.
The Guatemalan woman said she, her husband, and their 11-month-old baby went fishing on June 25 in the Everglades. A Florida wildlife officer approached them and asked for documents. Her husband had a valid driver's license, she said, but when the officer realized she didn't have any documents proving she was in the country legally, the officer called immigration authorities who detained the whole family.
After spending seven-and-a-half hours in what she describes as a 'dirty holding cell,' she and her baby – a US citizen – were released, but her husband was detained. She now wears an ankle bracelet.
Her husband later told her he remained in detention at the Dania Beach Jail, near Fort Lauderdale, for eight days, before being transferred to 'Alligator Alcatraz.'
Once transferred, he was unable to take a shower for six days and there were not enough facilities for washing hands, she said. On Friday, he was woken up at 3 a.m. to take a shower because of the number of people waiting for their turn, she said.
The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Florida detention facility, did not immediately reply to CNN's request for comment about specific allegations about conditions there.
In a written statement posted on X Tuesday, DHS said, 'ICE has higher detention standards than most U.S. prisons that hold actual U.S. citizens. All detainees are provided with proper meals, medical treatment, and have opportunities to communicate with lawyers and their family members.'
In little over a week, workers transformed the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport from an 11,000-foot runway into a temporary tent city President Donald Trump toured last week.
Trump raved about the facility's 'incredible' quick construction during his visit and pointed to the detention center as an example of what he wants to implement 'in many states.'
The project was fast-tracked under an executive order from DeSantis, who framed illegal immigration as a state emergency.
CNN's Isabel Rosales and Natalie Barr contributed to this report
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
There's virtually no chance Laura Loomer gets the special counsel she's asking for
Sorry, Laura Loomer. It is extraordinarily unlikely that President Donald Trump's Justice Department will heed the far-right commentator's call to appoint a special counsel to manage the Jeffrey Epstein files for reasons both practical and political: Doing so would require a reversal of such gargantuan proportions that it seems almost impossible to imagine. Every member of the DOJ's upper ranks — Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, soon-to-be Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward and top DOJ official Emil Bove — has forcefully argued that independent special counsels defy the Constitution. In fact, they helped develop the argument that crushed one of special counsel Jack Smith's criminal cases against Trump last year. Trump himself spent years attacking the existence of special counsels — prosecutors appointed by the Justice Department to handle certain politically explosive cases. And he celebrated U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon's ruling last year endorsing his argument. But it was Blanche, Woodward and Bove who refined the legal underpinnings of that argumentas criminal defense attorneys in Smith's investigation into the presence of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago after Trump's first term. Bondi, at the time, worked for the pro-Trump America First Policy Institute and signed a brief echoing the president's position. Now, they would need to abandon their arguments entirely. Loomer, an increasingly influential Trump adviser, has spearheaded calls for a special counsel to oversee the handling of files connected to the investigation of Epstein, the disgraced financier who was convicted of sex crimes and suspected of trafficking minors before he died by suicide in jail in 2019. Bondi in February told Fox News that a 'client list' with high-profile names associated with Epstein's crimes was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' Then, when Bondi and her DOJ leadership opted against making the case files public — despite years of hype and promises to expose the purportedly salacious details within them — Loomer began calling for Bondi to be fired and for a special counsel to take over the handling of the Epstein case. But the basis for a special counsel appointment in this case is unclear. DOJ regulations require that they be appointed to run active criminal investigations— which the Epstein case is not — and only when the Justice Department or administration has a conflict of interest connected to the matter. There's been no suggestion that Trump's DOJ leaders are conflicted, even if his allies have quarreled with their handling of it. On Wednesday, when asked if he was considering a special counsel, Trump said he had 'nothing to do with' the decision — effectively leaving the call to Bondi. Then today, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump 'would not recommend' that DOJ appoint a 'special prosecutor' in the Epstein saga. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. And special counsels, while maintaining a veneer of independence, nevertheless report to Justice Department leaders about major decisions and would, in this case, still operate under Bondi's supervision. In fact, the thrust of Bondi's argument in the Florida case was that Smith's claim of independent authority was inherently unconstitutional. 'Trump spent several years arguing that appointing a special counsel from outside DOJ was unconstitutional,' said Josh Blackman, a legal expert from South Texas College of Law Houston, who participated in the argument against Smith's appointment before Cannon. 'It is possible to designate a U.S. attorney to investigate. But that special counsel would still be supervised by Bondi. I'm not sure what would be gained.' Bondi would also have the ultimate say in whether any report from a special counsel is made public. Of course, precedent and consistency have not always dissuaded Trump from adopting politically convenient positions. But Trump has long distrusted special counsels and the independence they exercise, which can lead them down investigative paths that are not always predictable. In 2017, Trump's own Justice Department appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to probe the 2016 Trump campaign's links to Russia, an investigation that dogged him for two years and led to several prosecutions of close advisers. In 2020, Trump privately endorsed the appointment of attorney Sidney Powell as special counsel to investigate his false claims of election fraud, part of his campaign to cling to power despite losing at the polls. But resistance from senior White House aides scuttled the appointment. And in 2022, President Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, appointed Smith, a veteran prosecutor, to probe Trump's effort to subvert the 2020 election, as well as his alleged concealment of classified documents. Both probes led to federal criminal charges — the first ever against a former president — that were dropped after Trump won a second term.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Econ surprise, Wall Street's new highs
By Jamie McGeever ORLANDO, Florida (Reuters) -TRADING DAY Making sense of the forces driving global markets By Jamie McGeever, Markets Columnist Another batch of upbeat U.S. economic data including solid retail sales boosted risk appetite on Thursday, pushing to the back of investors' minds President Donald Trump's attacks on Fed Chair Jerome Powell and lifting the S&P 500 and Nasdaq to fresh record highs. More on that below. In my column today I pose the question: Would Powell's enforced departure, a monumental event in Fed history, crater markets or is such an eventuality actually largely priced in already? If you have more time to read, here are a few articles I recommend to help you make sense of what happened in markets today. 1. Battered dollar a boon for U.S. multinational companies 2. U.S. companies adopt options strategies to shield eurorevenues in case dollar recovers 3. Lofty U.S. stock market valuations bank on earningsstrength 4. Reversing U.S. immigration set to grab market attention:Mike Dolan 5. Bank of England scrutinizes lenders for dollar risk amidTrump worries, sources say Today's Key Market Moves * The Nasdaq rises 0.7% to a new high just shy of 21000points, and the S&P 500 gains 0.5% to a fresh peak of 6304. * The U.S. small cap Russell 2000 spikes 1.2%. * Netflix shares fall 3% in after-hours trade, despite Q2earnings beating forecasts. * The dollar index rises to a near 4-week high, the yen hugsrecent 3-month low ahead of key Upper House election on Sunday. * Oil up more than 1.5%, supported by low inventories andrenewed Middle East risks. Brent crude $69.55/bbl, WTI$67.58/bbl. Econ surprise, Wall Street's new highs Amid the frenzied Trump-Powell drama and heightened uncertainty around tariffs, U.S. economic data has quietly been coming in on the strong side. Thursday's figures reinforced that view, with the Philly Fed business index, producer price inflation, import prices and retail sales all pointing to an economy humming along at a solid clip with little sign of accelerating inflation. The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model estimate is signaling 2.4% growth in the second quarter, comfortably above blue chip consensus forecasts of 2.0%. Perhaps expectations were set so low following the post-Liberation Day chaos and market scare, but Citi's economic surprises index is now the highest since late May. Either way, the data broadly appears to be holding up, and the early indications from the earnings season getting under way are that U.S. corporate profits continue to beat expectations too. The highlights on Thursday were from United Airlines and PepsiCo. Friday's spotlight falls on American Express. That's the backdrop against which U.S. rates traders are pushing out the expected timing of the first rate cut to October from September. San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly on Thursday signaled two rate cuts this year are a reasonable projection. The global equity picture was also brightened on Thursday by Taiwan's TSMC, the world's main producer of advanced AI chips. It posted a record quarterly profit and said demand for artificial intelligence was getting stronger. TSMC's domestic shares hit a six-month peak, and its U.S.-listed shares leaped over 4% to a new high. On the trade front, Trump says a deal with India is "very close" and one with Europe is "possible", while Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick held a 45-minute phone call with Japan's top trade negotiator Ryosei Akazawa on Thursday. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will travel to Tokyo to meet with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on Friday for a separate event, but trade will surely be discussed, if not formally. Japan is very much on investors' minds ahead of Sunday's Upper House election which could see the Liberal Democratic Party ruling coalition lose its majority, heightening calls for the government to boost spending and cut taxes. The prospect of further fiscal slippage in the world's most indebted major economy and complications that would bring for the Bank of Japan have pushed the yen to a three-month low against the dollar and long Japanese Government Bond yields to record highs. The yen fell on Thursday, swept aside in the dollar's broad rebound, but bonds got a reprieve. The weakness in 20- and 30-year JGBs has added to the downward pressure on long-dated U.S. and European bonds. Sunday's vote will be key to whether the yen retests 150.00 per dollar and whether JGB yields make fresh highs next week. Trump has already crossed Fed independence Rubicon Whether Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is fired next week, forced to resign in six months or allowed to muddle through to the end of his term next May, the supposedly sacrosanct notion of Fed independence has already been shattered. Yet what's nearly as remarkable as President Donald Trump's attacks on Powell for not cutting interest rates is financial markets' resilience in the face of this extraordinary degree of political interference in monetary policy, unprecedented in recent decades. Equity investors are known for being optimists, but today's Wall Street is veritably Teflon-coated. Of course, Trump's attacks on Powell have not been without consequence. The dollar has clocked its worst start to a year since the United States dropped the gold standard in the early 1970s. Long-dated Treasury yields are the highest in 20 years, and the "term premium" on U.S. debt is the highest in over a decade. Consumers' inflation expectations, by some measures, are also the highest in decades. Inflation has been above the Fed's 2% target for over four years, and the prospect of a dovish Fed under the stewardship of a new Trump-friendly Chair could keep it that way. But that's not solely down to Fed policy and credibility risks. The Trump administration's fiscal and trade policies, and unilateralist position on the world political stage, have also tempted some investors to trim their exposure to U.S. debt and the dollar. Still, Wall Street seems immune to all that, and it closed in the green on Wednesday after Trump played down a Bloomberg report that he will soon fire Powell, a step he says is "highly unlikely". Even at the point of maximum selling before that rebuttal, the big U.S. equity indices were down less than 1%. Given the magnitude of the news investors were reacting to, that's barely a ripple, especially when you remember that the S&P 500 and Nasdaq hit record highs only 24 hours earlier. Indeed, the S&P 500 is enjoying its third-fastest rebound from a 20% drawdown in history, according to Fidelity's Jurrien Timmer. Goldman Sachs analysts also note that the index's price-to-earnings ratio of 22 times forward earnings is in the 97th percentile since 1980. And the Nasdaq is up 40% in barely three months. Taking all this into account, there's plenty of space for a correction. What's needed is a catalyst. Threatening the foundation of the financial system would seem to qualify, but will it? BECOMING IMMUNE One might argue that investors are simply skeptical that Trump really will oust Powell, even were it "for cause", ostensibly the Trump administration's ire over the $2.4 billion cost of renovating the Fed's building in Washington. But Trump has made it clear for months that he wants Powell replaced by someone more malleable, so whether it happens in the coming weeks, months, or May next year, the new Fed Chair will almost certainly be someone strongly influenced by the president. Of course, the Fed Chair is only one of 19 members of the Federal Open Market Committee and just one of 12 voting members at any given rate-setting meeting. He or she does not decide policy unilaterally. Still, the negative reaction to Powell leaving before his term is up could be powerful, even though you would expect it to be priced in to some extent by now. All else being equal, a more dovish-leaning Fed will reasonably be expected to weigh on short-dated yields, steepen the yield curve, and weaken the dollar as bond investors price in more rate cuts, and keep inflation closer to 3% than 2%. In the short term, stocks could benefit from expectations of a lower policy rate, although higher long-dated yields would increase the discount rate, which could be particularly negative for Big Tech and other growth stocks. JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon on Tuesday warned of the dangers of political interference in Fed policymaking, telling reporters on a conference call: "The independence of the Fed is absolutely critical. Playing around with the Fed can often have adverse consequences, absolutely opposite of what you might be hoping for." That Rubicon has already been crossed, and for now at least, markets appear to have accepted that. What could move markets tomorrow? * Japan consumer price inflation (June) * Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba meets U.S. TreasurySecretary Scott Bessent * Germany producer price inflation (June) * University of Michigan U.S. consumer sentiment, inflationexpectations (July) * U.S. Q2 earnings, focus on American Express Want to receive Trading Day in your inbox every weekday morning? Sign up for my newsletter here. Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias. (By Jamie McGeever; Editing by Nia Williams) Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Peter Bart: With YouTube Soaring, PBS Fading And Film Struggling, Critics As We Know Them Might Be An Endangered Species
The three news stories ran back to back last week but only one stirred much attention. One story warned that both NPR and PBS are facing a dire squeeze, even extinction, due to funding cutbacks. A second disclosed new data revealing YouTube's more dominant share of TV viewership (are Emmys next?). The third revealed that the New York Times was about to replace four of its most prominent culture critics. The critics story might have received further attention in a more alert pop culture but it was essentially buried, suggesting that some Times readers felt there wasn't anything worth criticizing. More from Deadline Senate Votes To Cut Federal Funding To Public Broadcasting; 'Against The Will Of The American People,' PBS CEO Says New York Times To Reassign Music, TV And Theater Critics As Part Of Effort To Bring 'Different Perspectives' To Coverage Senate Starts "Vote-A-Rama" As It Heads For Final Roll Call On Rescinding Federal Funding For PBS, NPR And Public Media Stations The formidable climb of YouTube in audience and influence has indeed startled the pop culture universe. Even Netflix's content factory is now licensing the very YouTube creators whom audiences once disdained as amateurs. YouTube and Netflix together account for 20% of TV viewing – news that would seemingly rivet advertiser attention. But AI is disrupting major ad agencies, causing them to slash jobs and shift marketing strategy. In film, meanwhile, the expanding ambitions of Silicon Valley giants like Apple and Amazon threaten to challenge the slates of legacy studios. Investors have seemingly taken notice: Brands delivering the most future action among investors may not be for content at all, but rather for celebrity brands like Rihanna or Wiz Khalifa and his mushroom-growing kit. The media has belatedly taken notice: Overall, the term 'critic' itself seems outdated amid the post-Trumpian cultural chaos. That may have been what the Times concluded in 're-assigning' its gurus covering theater, TV, pop music or even classical music. Film critics were not affected perhaps because, as one Times veteran said, 'there's no space for what they cover anyway.' In eras past, the re-assignment of a Bosley Crowther in film or a Frank Rich in theater would have prompted a cataclysm from the readership. In his memoir, Crowther admitted he was haunted by the financial impact of his reviews; a high-profile studio movie would be doomed by a negative Times review. Rich's theater critiques so consistently obliterated Broadway ticket sales that they prompted threats of advertising boycotts. The public battle of playwright David Hare against Rich inspired a Variety headline declaring 'Ruffled Hare Airs Rich Bitch.' Sime Silverman, who started Variety in 1905, hired street-tough critics to round out his critical fraternity. A burly one-time bartender named Jack Pulaski covered 'legit' (as Variety called theater) and a circus performer names Al Greason handled film. The various critics hated Tobacco Road but oddly liked Birth of a Nation. The most widely read tyrant among film critics was Pauline Kael, who even briefly tried her hand at development in Hollywood. She admitted that the critical sensibility did not translate to box office. Sensibilities are also being challenged by the problems looming at PBS and NPR, threatened by a combination of Trumpian defunding and fading local support. Were Congress to reduce funding for public radio alone, up to 1,000 local member stations reportedly would face closure. NPR receives only 2% of its funding directly from the federal government, but PBS gets 15%. Congress may imminently end public support for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting, which distributes money to NPR and PBS. So will the Times replace its culture critics and where will they come from? Will their reviews take the form of podcasts or appear on more exotic platforms? Further, instead of focusing on theater or concerts, will Times critics review YouTube stars like Michelle Khare, the daredevil who emulates Houdini or tries Tom Cruise-like airplane stunts. Survival in pop culture itself has become a stunt, they might argue. Best of Deadline The Movies That Have Made More Than $1 Billion At The Global Box Office Everything We Know About 'Stranger Things' Season 5 So Far 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery