
DHS secretary praises Florida's 'Alligator Alcatraz' plan as agency expands immigration detention
By REBECCA SANTANA
The Homeland Security secretary is praising Florida for coming forward with an idea that's been dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz' because it would house immigration detainees in a facility being built in a Florida swamp.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said the department has been looking to expand immigration detention capacity, and she has been reviewing contracts Immigration and Customs Enforcement has with various vendors for detention beds.
'The ones with some of the vendors that we had, I felt were way too expensive, and that those vendors were not giving us fair prices and so I went directly to states and to ask them if they could do a better job providing this service,' she said in an interview with The Associated Press as her Latin America trip wound down late Thursday.
She said the department has been reaching out to states or companies who aren't regular ICE contractors to see whether they're able to provide the detention space the department needs at a better price.
'We really are looking for people that want to help drive down the cost but still provide a very high level of detention facility,' she said.
Noem said Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier brought this particular idea to the department.
'They were willing to build it and do it much quicker than what some of the other vendors were. And it was a real solution that we'll be able to utilize if we need to,' she said. Noem said they evaluated the contract and it 'made sense.'
As the Trump administration has dramatically ramped up immigration enforcement around the country as part of its mass deportation effort, the number of people in ICE detention has swelled. ICE detention facilities are currently holding more than 56,000 immigrants in June, the most since 2019.
Florida officials have dubbed the facility that they're building in the remote and ecologically sensitive wetland about 45 miles (72 kilometers) west of downtown Miami as 'Alligator Alcatraz." The facility located at an isolated Everglades airfield surrounded by mosquito-, python- and alligator-filled swamplands is just days away from being operational.
The detention facility is the latest effort by Florida to assist in President Trump's mass deportation agenda.
Noem said some of the ICE detention contracts put in place under her predecessor, Alejandro Mayorkas, were for 10-15 years.
'That's insane to me. If we do our job correctly, we shouldn't be doing this 15 years from now,' she said.
The detention contracts were among a range of subjects Noem spoke about with the Associated Press during an interview in Guatemala City on the tail end of her four-country tour through Central America. Noem made stops in Panama, Costa Rica, Honduras, and Guatemala.
Here are some of the other highlights of the conversation:
Noem said that President Trump 'encouraged' her to visit countries in Central America that have historically been points of origin for many migrants to the United States and 'get more security agreements or to finalize ones' where discussions had already started — and to 'get them across the finish line.'
She praised Honduras for being 'much more of a partner' than in the past and said that they had signed a safe third country agreement with Honduras, calling it a 'big win from this trip.' She said Guatemala on Thursday also agreed to be a safe third country.
The agreements expand the Trump administration's efforts to provide the U.S. government flexibility in returning migrants not only to their own countries, but also to third countries as it attempts to ramp up deportations.
'We've never believed that the United States should be the only option, that the guarantee for a refugee is that they go somewhere to be safe and to be protected from whatever threat they face in their country," she said. 'It doesn't necessarily have to be the United States.'
Noem said those agreements were something the administration has been working on 'for months' but they weren't happening 'until we came here.'
'We've been putting a lot of pressure on them to finalize those agreements,' she said. 'And both of those countries did, which is great.'
Both governments denied having signed safe third-country agreements when asked following Noem's comments.
Noem had said Thursday that 'politically, this is a difficult agreement for their governments to do.'
Both countries have limited resources and many needs making support for asylum-seekers from other countries a tougher sell domestically. There are also the optics of two left-of-center governments appearing to help the Trump administration limit access to U.S. asylum.
Noem also signed an agreement with Guatemala on Thursday that establishes a Joint Security Program under which U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers would work with the Guatemala government to improve border security in Guatemala.
Under the agreement, CBP officers will be stationed at the country's international airport and possibly other airports in the future to assist the Guatemalan government in identifying travelers who might be involved in terrorism or other crimes or pose a threat to Guatemala by smuggling contraband or currency in or out of the country.
Noem said both Costa Rica and Guatemala want to partner with the United States. 'Guatemala and Costa Rica, I feel like, are competing for this a little bit. They both want to be America's strongest partners,' she said.
Costa Rica specifically wants U.S. help in its efforts to screen every person or package coming into the country, she said.
Noem said Costa Rican President Rodrigo Chaves isn't asking the U.S. to pay for the technology or equipment but instead wants help negotiating with private companies to get Costa Rica what it needs.
The partnership is different in Guatemala, though. There, Noem said, the government wants American help in going after drug cartels.
Speaking of her talks with Guatemalan President Bernardo Arevalo, she said he had specific requests during their meeting Thursday designed to help Guatemala target cartels.
'He wants us to help support him in going after them because they're seeing a big increase in drug usage here in this country,' she said.
She said Panama, which is home to the economically crucial Panama Canal, has been a 'priority of this administration.' The country is also a key part of the migration route from South America to the United States. In recent years, hundreds of thousands of migrants have traversed the treacherous Darien Gap connecting Panama and Colombia.
Although that traffic started to fall last year under the Biden administration and dwindled to nothing after Trump took office, Noem said during her time in Panama they discussed how to sustain that drop. But she was critical of Panama when it came to information-sharing: 'That country has worked with us, but it hasn't been our greatest partner I would say as far as sharing information."
© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

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


Yomiuri Shimbun
32 minutes ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Trump Says He Will Move Aggressively to Undo Nationwide Blocks on His Agenda
An emboldened Trump administration plans to aggressively challenge blocks on the president's top priorities, from immigration to education, following a major Supreme Court ruling that limits the power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions. Government attorneys will press judges to pare back the dozens of sweeping rulings thwarting the president's agenda 'as soon as possible,' said a White House official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal deliberations. Priorities for the administration include injunctions related to the Education Department and the U.S. DOGE Service, as well as an order halting the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the official said, detailing efforts to implement plans President Donald Trump announced Friday. 'Thanks to this decision, we can now promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis,' Trump said at a news conference, during which he thanked by name members of the conservative high court majority he helped build. Trump on Friday cast the narrowing of judicial power as a consequential, needed correction in his battle with a court system that has restrained his authority. Scholars and plaintiffs in the lawsuits over Trump's orders agreed that the high court ruling could profoundly reshape legal battles over executive power that have defined Trump's second term – even as other legal experts said the effects would be more muted. Some predicted it would embolden Trump to push his expansive view of presidential power. 'The Supreme Court has fundamentally reset the relationship between the federal courts and the executive branch,' Notre Dame Law School professor Samuel Bray, who has studied nationwide injunctions, said in a statement. 'Since the Obama administration, almost every major presidential initiative has been frozen by federal district courts issuing 'universal injunctions.'' Nationwide injunctions put a freeze on an action until a court can make a decision on its legality. They have became a go-to tool for critics of presidential actions in recent times, sometimes delaying for years the implementation of an executive order the court ultimately approves. Experts said the Supreme Court's ruling could make it more difficult and cumbersome to challenge executive actions. It could result in courts issuing a patchwork of rulings on presidential orders in different parts of the country. In the short term, the ruling is a setback for liberals who have gone to court to thwart Trump. But the decision could also ultimately constrain conservatives seeking broad rulings to rein in a future Democratic president. Trump undertook a flurry of executive actions in the opening month of his term that ranged from dismantling government agencies to seeking the end of birthright citizenship. There have been more than 300 lawsuits seeking to block his executive actions. Federal district judges have issued roughly 50 rulings to date, temporarily holding up the administration's moves to cut foreign aid, conduct mass layoffs and fire probationary employees, terminate legal representation for young migrants, ban birthright citizenship, and more nationwide. Some of those rulings have been stayed by higher courts. The Supreme Court found Friday that federal district courts must limit their injunctions to the parties bringing the case, which could be individuals, organizations or states. They had previously been able to issue injunctions that applied to people not directly involved in cases. The ruling came as part of a case challenging Trump's ban on birthright citizenship. The court did not rule on the constitutionality of that executive order. The justices left it to lower courts to determine whether a nationwide injunction might be a proper form of relief for states in some cases, like the ban on birthright citizenship, where the harm could be widespread. The court also did not forestall plaintiffs from seeking nationwide relief through class-action lawsuits. Smita Ghosh, a senior appellate counsel with the Constitutional Accountability Center, a progressive public interest law firm, said the ruling could be a blow to plaintiffs seeking to stymie Trump's executive orders. The CAC has filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of plaintiffs challenging the birthright citizenship ban. 'This approach will make it more difficult and more time-consuming to challenge unconstitutional executive practices, limiting courts' abilities to constrain unlawful presidential action at a time when many believe that they need it most,' Ghosh said. Many groups will pivot to filing class-action lawsuits to sidestep the ruling, she predicted, as some plaintiffs in the birthright citizenship lawsuit sought to do Friday. Such lawsuits allow individuals or groups to sue on behalf of a larger class of individuals who have suffered a similar harm from a government policy. It's likely courts will see more and more class- or mass-action lawsuits from cities, counties and states that realize they can no longer rely on litigation brought by others to advocate for their interests, said Jonathan Miller, chief program officer for the Public Rights Project, which is challenging several Trump policies. 'I think this decision will be perceived by this administration as a green light to more aggressively pursue its agenda, be bolder when it comes to compliance with injunction and its willingness to test the limits of the judiciary,' Miller said. Not everyone expected the ruling to have broad impacts. Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which has filed numerous challenges against Trump's agenda, called it a 'limited ruling' and said the court left open a number of routes for challenges against executive actions that could result in broad blocks on Trump's policies. Ed Whelan, a conservative attorney, was likewise skeptical. He wrote in a newsletter that 'the ruling is probably going to accomplish much less than many people celebrating it realize,' in part because plaintiffs would instead pursue more class-action lawsuits that would ultimately produce similar results as nationwide injunctions. The administration on Friday trumpeted the decision at the White House as a victory in its broader fight against the judiciary. Officials frequently deride judges who rule against the administration as activists and obstructionists. Dozens of judges appointed by presidents of both parties have temporarily paused many of Trump's efforts, and data shows threats against the judiciary have risen since he took office. 'Americans are getting what they voted for, no longer will we have rogue judges striking down President Trump's policies across the entire nation,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said, standing beside Trump at the news conference. She added, 'These lawless injunctions … turned district courts into the imperial judiciary.' Both Democratic and Republican presidents have complained about the blocks, said Jesse Panuccio, a partner at the Boies Schiller Flexner law firm and a Justice Department official in the first Trump administration. 'I think the ruling is seismic for how the federal district courts have been doing business in the last 20 years or so because the universal injunction has become a fairly standard and – in my view – unlawful remedy in cases,' Panuccio said.


Yomiuri Shimbun
32 minutes ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
What's in Trump and Senate Republicans' Tax and Immigration Bill?
New tax breaks. Massive spending on border security. Cuts to social safety net programs. Pullbacks on investments to fight climate change. New limits on student loans. If it becomes law, President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans' massive bill will reshape much of the federal government – and the U.S. economy. The House narrowly passed the legislation in May and sent it to the Senate, which is set to take up the One Big Beautiful Bill Act as soon as Saturday. Republicans are trying to move quickly to reverse many of President Joe Biden's legislative accomplishments and cement Trump's legacy in the tax code, on the U.S.-Mexico border, and in generations-old anti-poverty programs. The legislation would devote hundreds of billions of dollars to finishing Trump's border wall, fortifying maritime border crossings, outfitting the Defense Department and more. It would extend the tax cuts that were one of the signature legislative achievements of Trump's first term, create new savings accounts for newborns and fulfill some, but not all, of the president's campaign promises. The Republican negotiations over the bill are far from over. The Senate overhauled the legislation in ways that some House lawmakers find unrecognizable. Trump and Senate leaders are banking on the House accepting those changes, even if lawmakers in the lower chamber have concerns over myriad issues, including the social safety net and national debt. The GOP is using the budget reconciliation process to shepherd the measure, which allows them to dodge a Democratic filibuster in the Senate and pass it on party lines. Here's what's in the Senate version of the proposal released overnight. Extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut taxes for individuals of nearly all income levels, concentrating most of the benefits among the wealthiest earners and corporations. The business tax cuts are permanent, but the individual portions expire at the end of the year. So if Congress doesn't act, tax rates will go up on most households. The Republican bill would permanently extend the lower rates for individuals. Increase the standard deduction The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act doubled the standard deduction, which is the baseline amount of income filers can collect tax-free. This legislation would preserve that policy and add to it, increasing the deduction by up to $2,000 for married couples filing jointly and $1,000 for single filers, to $32,000 for couples and $16,000 for individuals. Cuts to Medicaid To meet budget goals, Republicans are making deep cuts and instituting eligibility restrictions on Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for low-income individuals and people with disabilities. The Senate implements work requirements and new cost-sharing structures and puts strict limits on Medicaid provider taxes, duties that states charge medical providers as a roundabout way of collecting more federal Medicaid dollars. Some in the GOP wish to use that policy to force states to jettison immigrants from benefits rolls. Rural hospital bailout fund To soften the blow of the provider tax limitations, the Senate created a $25 billion fund to stabilize rural hospitals and health clinics. The fund would begin in 2028 when the new provider tax policies begin, and sunset in 2032. A little SALT The bill quadruples the cap on the state and local tax deduction, or SALT, which lets filers write off the amount they paid in local taxes from their federal tax bill. But that increase would only last a little while. After five years, the SALT cap would snap back down to $10,000. Making states pay for SNAP The legislation would cap future expansion of SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program formerly known as food stamps. It would also pass on more of the cost for administering the program to state governments, potentially forcing local officials to decide whether to cut benefits or dig into their state and municipal budgets. States with higher rates of improper payments would be required to shoulder up to 15 percent of benefits costs. Today, states and the federal government split the costs of running SNAP's operations evenly. Beginning in 2027, the federal government would only cover a quarter of the cost. Increase the child tax credit – for some The child tax credit is a tax break for filers with children. The Republican measure would increase the credit to $2,200 per child, from $2,000, then would link it to inflation. But not every family can qualify: The legislation limits eligibility to parents or guardians with Social Security numbers, essentially requiring claimants to be citizens or immigrants who have obtained valid Social Security numbers. That would mostly exclude noncitizen parents from claiming the credit on behalf of a child who is a citizen. A border wall, other barriers and immigration restrictions The Senate version designates nearly $85 billion for the Trump administration's border and immigration crackdown. That is about half of what the House proposed for border and immigration funding. The Senate would spend $6.5 billion to complete the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and other fortifications, including at maritime crossings. More than $54 billion would go to building and maintaining detention centers to house and transport families of deportees. New taxes on colleges and universities The legislation aggressively taxes income generated by the endowments of colleges and universities. Current law imposes a 1.4 percent tax on those institutions. This bill creates a new system that would set varying tax rates depending on the size of the endowment per enrolled student: Savings accounts for newborns The proposal would give newborn babies a $1,000 savings account that the legislation calls a 'Trump account.' (A previous version dubbed them 'money account for growth and advancement,' or a MAGA account.) Parents or beneficiaries could contribute $5,000 each year to that account until the beneficiary is 31 years old. The idea mirrors a pitch from Democratic Sen. Cory Booker (New Jersey) for 'baby bonds.' No tax on tips Trump campaigned heavily on ending taxes on tips, and now that policy is in the bill. The legislation would allow a tax deduction for the total amount of tipped income received. It contains some guardrails to prevent 'highly compensated employees' from claiming their earnings as tips and specifically identifies food service, hair care, nail care, aesthetics, and body and spa treatments as professions eligible to receive the deduction. No tax on overtime Another of Trump's campaign promises, this provision would exempt overtime wages from taxes through a new deduction. The legislation wouldn't allow deduction of overtime wages from tips or for 'highly compensated employees,' and requires filers to use a Social Security number when claiming the deduction, deeming most undocumented immigrants ineligible. No tax on car loan interest The bill would allow purchasers of American-made cars to deduct up to $10,000 in car loan interest payments for four years – an idea Trump talked about on the campaign trail and then returned to as his tariffs began to bite the auto industry. For tax filers earning more than $100,000 (or $200,000 for married couples filing jointly), the loan interest deduction would phase out by $200 for every $1,000 of additional income. A bonus deduction for seniors Trump promised last year to end taxes on Social Security benefits. The bill doesn't include that provision, but it would add an extra $6,000 to the standard deduction for people over 65 years old. The policy would taper off as a recipient's income increased. Billions for defense, including Trump's 'Golden Dome' There is roughly $158 billion in the bill for the Defense Department, spread over several priorities: $25 billion for the munition and defense supply chain, $329 billion for shipbuilding, and $34 billion for missile defense and space capabilities – that's partially for Trump's 'Golden Dome' continental missile defense system. Sell federal land The bill would require the Bureau of Land Management to sell between a quarter and half a percent of the agency's land holdings to build new housing. It specifically exempts national parks, national monuments, national recreation areas, wilderness areas, other wildlands and contracted grazing areas. Repeal Biden student loan forgiveness The legislation would save $320 billion over 10 years by repealing the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness program and making other changes to loan repayments. Tax credits for home schooling or private school The bill includes up to $4 billion per year in tax credits that benefit people who donate to organizations that help families pay for private-school tuition or home schooling. It would create a 100 percent tax credit for donations to scholarship-granting organizations, with taxpayers fully reimbursed for their donations when they file their taxes. Rescind money to fight climate change The proposal would gut elements of Biden's signature 2022 climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act. It would eliminate a federal tax credit of up to $7,500 that consumers can receive for buying an electric vehicle. Republicans would also quickly phase out incentives for the production of clean energy, such as wind and solar power. New oil, gas and coal production The Natural Resources Committee would require the federal government to immediately begin selling leases for oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and in protected Alaskan wildlands. It would also force the Interior Department to approve more coal production and reduce regulations to make it cheaper to extract. Auction the spectrum The electromagnetic spectrum is necessary for everything from wireless technologies to military communications and radars. The legislation would renew the Federal Communications Commission's authority to auction off bands of spectrum that the Commerce, Science and Transportation says could raise $85 billion over 10 years. Cut protections for federal workers The legislation would require an audit of dependents of federal employees on government health insurance plans. Earlier editions of the measure would have forced new federal employees to choose between accepting an at-will classification that would make it easier to be fired or putting more of their salary toward retirement, and recalculated worker retirement benefits. Those provisions were removed. Raise the debt ceiling The debt ceiling sets the amount of money the federal government can borrow to pay for expenses already incurred. The government technically eclipsed the limit at the end of 2024, but the Treasury Department is taking 'extraordinary measures' to put off the need to take on more debt. But those measures will expire sometime in August. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Friday refused to answer questions on an exact date, a break from previous administrations. The Senate bill would raise the debt limit by $5 trillion.


Japan Today
7 hours ago
- Japan Today
U.S. inflation edges up as Trump renews criticism of Fed chief
The Federal Reserve's preferred inflation gauge rose 2.3 percent in May, but consumer spending pulled back in part due to autos By Beiyi SEOW The U.S. Federal Reserve's preferred inflation measure logged a mild uptick Friday while spending weakened, triggering another tirade by President Donald Trump against the central bank chair for not cutting interest rates sooner. "We have a guy that's just a stubborn mule and a stupid person," Trump told an event at the White House, referring to Fed Chair Jerome Powell. "He's making a mistake." With Powell's term as Fed chief coming to an end next year, Trump hinted at his choice of successor: "I'm going to put somebody that wants to cut rates." The president's remarks came after government data showed the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index climbing 2.3 percent last month from a year ago in May. This was in line with analyst expectations and a slight acceleration from April's 2.2 percent increase, but still a relatively mild uptick. Excluding the volatile food and energy sectors, the PCE price index was up 2.7 percent, rising from April's 2.6 percent uptick, the Commerce Department's report showed. But consumer spending declined, after Trump's fresh tariffs in April dragged on consumer sentiment. PCE dropped by 0.1 percent from the preceding month, reversing an earlier rise. While Trump has imposed sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners since returning to the White House in January -- alongside higher rates on imports of steel, aluminum and autos -- these have had a muted effect so far on inflation. This is in part because he held off or postponed some of his harshest salvos, while businesses are still running through inventory they stockpiled in anticipation of the levies. But central bank officials have not rushed to slash interest rates, saying they can afford to wait and learn more about the impact of Trump's recent duties. They expect to learn more about the tariffs' effects over the summer. "The experience of the limited range of tariffs introduced in 2018 suggests that pass-through to consumer prices is intense three-to-six months after their implementation," warned economists Samuel Tombs and Oliver Allen of Pantheon Macroeconomics in a note. They flagged weakness in consumer spending, in part due to a pullback in autos after buyers rushed to get ahead of levies. And spending on services was tepid even after excluding volatile components, they said. "There has also been a clear weakening in discretionary services spending, notably in travel and hospitality," said Michael Pearce, deputy chief US economist at Oxford Economics, in a note. This reflects "the chilling effect of the plunge in consumer sentiment," he added. Between April and May, the PCE price index was up 0.1 percent, the Commerce Department report showed. As a July deadline approaches for higher tariff rates to kick in on dozens of economies, all eyes are also on whether countries can reach lasting trade deals with Washington to ease the effects of tariffs. For now, despite the slowing in economic growth, Pearce said risks that inflation could increase will keep the Fed on hold with interest rates "until much later in the year." © 2025 AFP