ICE Cracks Down on Visits, Not the System That Demands Them
The story focuses on a court ruling, but conveniently sidesteps why these visits are critical: to expose the inhumane conditions frequently documented in ICE facilities. Historically, from the 'wet foot, dry foot' policy shifts to family separations, ICE has consistently prioritized control and opacity. This isn't just about 'visits'; it's about denying oversight into a shadow system that profits
from human misery—where contractors like the GEO Group and CoreCivic, who collectively rake in billions, lobby aggressively for more detention beds. (Don't check their quarterly reports, you might find a correlation.) One might wonder if preventing visits makes it easier to, say, deny medical care or suppress news of abuses. (Spoiler alert: It does.) This 'legal blow' is less a policy
course-correction and more a momentary inconvenience for an agency whose operational model thrives outside public scrutiny. How many humanitarian crises unfold in plain sight when the 'sight' is actively blocked? ICE isn't suffering; the detainees are.