Claire Roncallo, Associate Member, Immigration and Human Rights Law Review
I. Introduction
The infamous Alcatraz, a now-closed prison island off the coast of San Francisco Bay, was once known for being virtually inescapable and notoriously cruel, defined by its strict rules, harsh conditions, and extreme isolation.[1] Today, its legacy has been used as inspiration for a modern immigration detention facility in Florida.[2]
In the Florida Everglades, the federal government instructed the state of Florida to construct a makeshift immigration detention center, dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.” The facility was erected in just eight days and was designed to house up to 3,000 immigration detainees.[3] Florida Governor Ron DeSantis defended the site selection as a security measure, stating that “there’s a lot of alligators you’re going to have to contend (with).”[4] Members of Congress who toured the facility, however, painted a grimly different scene: hundreds of migrants in confined cages, enduring sweltering heat, bug infestations, and provided with meager meals.[5]
This Blog examines the political and legal origins of Alligator Alcatraz and argues that its operation violates fundamental due process protections, undermines federal supremacy in immigration enforcement, and falls short of the United States’ constitutional and human rights obligations.
II. Background
States, particularly Florida, have become increasingly involved in immigration enforcement in recent years.[6] Florida has expanded its role through measures such as transporting immigrants to other states, mandating E-Verify for employers, and increasing cooperation agreements between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities.[7] The construction of Alligator Alcatraz is a product of the federal 287(g) Program[8], which permits state and local law enforcement agencies to perform limited federal immigration functions under the supervision of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).[9] In practice, the 287(g) Program transforms local officials into de facto ICE agents, redeploying them from traditional, local public-safety responsibilities to immigration enforcement.[10] Historically, however, detention and deportation have been the exclusive responsibility of the federal government, which raises concerns about the scope of Florida’s authority to independently operate an immigration detention facility for federal immigration purposes.[11]
Law enforcement leaders who oppose the 287(g) Program argue that it drains local resources and undermines public safety by discouraging immigrant communities from seeking police assistance; simply calling 911 could result in someone they know getting deported.[12] Critics contend that Florida’s creation and operation of Alligator Alcatraz pushes the boundaries of state authority in immigration enforcement.[13] However, state officials defend the facility as a necessary measure to ensure public safety and reduce the burden on federal detention centers.[14]
The creation of Alligator Alcatraz reflects a broader political effort by Florida to assert greater control over immigration enforcement.[15] In 2025, Governor Ron DeSantis signed the Immigration Enforcement and Public Safety Act, authorizing the construction of a state-run detention center in the Florida Everglades.[16] Governor DeSantis framed the detention center as necessary to alleviate the strain on state law enforcement and jails which have seen an influx in immigrants since the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.[17] DeSantis openly expressed the goal of expanding detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants.[18] State and federal officials often tout this facility as a model of efficiency, deterrence, and security due to its remote location and its proximity to airport runways.[19]
However, human rights organizations and legal experts challenge this narrative, claiming that the facility operates without adequate levels of federal oversight and violates constitutional protections and international human rights norms.[20] In particular, there are potential violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention Against Torture (CAT) because of the facility’s reported lack of sanitation, medical care, and access to legal counsel which falls short of the minimum standards of humane treatment required for individuals in detention under international law.[21]
Members of Congress and other advocacy groups who toured the site reported overcrowded cages, extreme heat, and minimal access to healthcare and legal counsel.[22] Civil rights activists argue that these conditions violate constitutional rights guaranteed by the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments.[23] These amendments protect detainees’ rights to communicate with counsel and the outside world, to be free from deprivation of liberty without due process, and to be held under conditions that do not amount to cruel and unusual punishment.[24] In response, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed lawsuits challenging these violations on behalf of detainees and legal service providers.[25] As a result, Alligator Alcatraz has become a focal point in the broader debate of how far states may go in enforcing federal immigration law.[26] This debate raises important questions about the protection of fundamental rights and human dignity.
III. Discussion
Reports from members of Congress, journalists, and human rights organizations raise serious concerns about the conditions inside Alligator Alcatraz.[27] Detainees describe going days without access to water for bathing, receiving food only once per day—sometimes contaminated with worms—and enduring constant light exposure and mosquito infestations.[28] These reports depict conditions that fall far below acceptable standards of humane treatment.[29] Civil rights and legal organizations argue that such conditions endanger detainees’ health and safety while simultaneously violating core constitutional protections.[30]
A. Due Process Violations
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee that no person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Yet detainees at Alligator Alcatraz are reportedly held without timely bond hearings, issuances of Notices to Appear, or meaningful access to legal counsel.[31]
Core constitutional provisions such as the freedom of religion and speech, the right to due process, and equal protection under the law apply to citizens and noncitizens alike.[32] The Constitution’s use of terms such as “people” or “person” rather than “citizen” has long been understood to extend these protections to all individuals physically present within the United States, regardless of citizenship status.[33] Because immigration proceedings are classified as civil rather than criminal, the government maintains that detainees are not entitled to the same constitutional protections afforded to criminal defendants, such as the right to a government-appointed attorney or heightened procedural safeguards.[34] However, the Supreme Court has made clear that due process protections do not disappear simply because detention occurs in the civil immigration context. In Zadvydas v. Davis, the Court recognized that “freedom from imprisonment—from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint—lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.”[35]
By permitting the prolonged or indefinite confinement of individuals without meaningful judicial review, the practices reported at Alligator Alcatraz raise the very constitutional concerns that Zadvyas sought to prevent.[36] These due process deficiencies not only undermine fundamental liberty interests, but also exacerbate other constitutional violations, including those related to the conditions of confinement and Florida’s obligations under the Eighth Amendment.
B. Cruel and Unusual Punishment (Eighth Amendment)
The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, a protection that extends to detainees through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.[37] Courts have interpreted this provision to forbid deliberate indifference to detainees’ basic needs, including adequate food, medical care, and safe living conditions.[38] Reports from Alligator Alcatraz, including overcrowding, unsanitary conditions, and prolonged exposure to heat and insects, suggest deliberate neglect rising to the level of constitutional concern.[39] Under Bell v. Wolfish, detention conditions that amount to punishment, or that are excessive in relation to legitimate government objectives, violate due process.[40] The reported conditions at Alligator Alcatraz raise serious questions as to whether Florida’s operation of the facility crosses the constitutional line into impermissible punishment and exceeds the limits of state authority.[41] In turn, these Eighth Amendment concerns pose an even broader question: whether Florida has the authority to operate such a detention facility in the first place.
C. Federalism and the Limits of State Authority
Beyond the inhumane conditions at Alligator Alcatraz, the creation and operation of Alligator Alcatraz implicate fundamental principles of federalism.[42] Immigration enforcement has long been recognized as a core federal responsibility, and opponents of Alligator Alcatraz have questioned whether states possess authority to independently detain individuals for federal immigration purposes.[43]
Under the Supremacy Clause and Arizona v. United States, the federal government maintains exclusive authority over immigration enforcement.[44] Florida’s decision to operate an immigration detention facility without consistent federal oversight risks violating the constitutional allocation of authority over immigration enforcement.[45] In M.A. v. Guthrie, the ACLU and co-plaintiffs allege that Florida has impermissibly expanded the scope of federal-state cooperation by constructing and operating a large-scale immigration detention center, despite the fact that the 287(g) Program authorizes only narrowly defined law enforcement functions and not independent state detention.[46] The complaint cites Arizona v. United States, arguing that the state’s action exceeds delegated powers and undermines federal supremacy in immigration enforcement.[47] Beyond these constitutional and federalism concerns, Alligator Alcatraz also raises significant questions under international human rights law.
D. International Human Rights Implications
The facility’s conditions also appear inconsistent with the United States’ obligations under international law. The ICCPR guarantees freedom from arbitrary detention and requires that detainees be treated with humanity and respect for inherent dignity.[48] Similarly, CAT prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.[49] The United States has signed and ratified both the ICCPR and CAT, rendering these obligations binding on the federal government.[50] By denying adequate access to counsel, food, sanitation, and medical care, Alligator Alcatraz violates the minimum standards of humane treatment required under both treaties.[51] Although neither agreement explicitly requires external monitoring mechanisms, the lack of transparency and oversight at Alligator Alcatraz undermines their core purpose: preventing abuse and safeguarding human dignity in detention settings.[52] These failures highlight the need for structural reforms to ensure lawful and humane detention practices.
E. Possible Reforms
Addressing the constitutional and human rights violations associated with Alligator Alcatraz requires both immediate oversight and long-term structural reform. The reported conditions—prolonged detention, lack of legal access, and substandard living conditions— underscore the need for stronger federal accountability mechanisms and clearer statutory limits on state involvement in immigration enforcement.[53]
1. Strengthen Federal Oversight and Limit State Authority
Congress and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should clarify the scope of authority delegated to states under the 287(g) Program.[54] The situation at Alligator Alcatraz demonstrates how ambiguous delegation has enabled Florida to operate a quasi-independent detention system with limited federal supervision.[55] Codifying stricter federal control over detention standards and requiring periodic federal audits would help ensure compliance with constitutional and human rights norms.[56] Additionally, Congress could amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the primary federal statute governing immigration, to explicitly prohibit states from operating immigration detention facilities outside of federal oversight, reaffirming the supremacy of federal authority in this domain.[57]
2. Ensure Due Process and Access to Counsel
To safeguard constitutional rights, detainees need to have timely access to legal counsel and meaningful opportunities to challenge their detention.[58] Many of the reported abuses at Alligator Alcatraz stem from the inability of detainees to contact attorneys, receive legal guidance, or obtain bond hearings within a reasonable timeframe.[59] To address this issue, the federal government should require all immigration detention facilities to implement reliable systems for attorney access, including secure phone lines, video conferencing, and designated meeting spaces.[60] Further, expanding programs like the Legal Orientation Program, a federal initiative that provides detained immigrants with information about their legal rights, would also help ensure that detainees understand their rights and have access to basic legal assistance.[61] In addition, statutory limits on detention without judicial review would help prevent indefinite confinement and reinforce constitutional protections.[62]
3. Improve Detention Conditions
Although the DHS Office of Inspector General now conducts unannounced inspections of immigration detention facilities, recent reports show that many violations remain uncorrected.[63] The conditions at Alligator Alcatraz demonstrate that inspections alone are insufficient without stronger enforcement.[64] A federal district judge previously found that the reported conditions raised serious constitutional concerns and ordered the state to wind down the facility’s operations.[65] However, a three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit temporarily stayed that injunction, permitting Florida to continue operating the detention center while the appeal proceeds.[66] This procedural posture highlights the limits of existing oversight systems and shows the need for stronger federal enforcement tools, including public reporting requirements, mandatory corrective action plans, and penalties for noncompliance.
IV. Conclusion
The controversy surrounding Alligator Alcatraz demonstrates the growing tension between state initiative and federal supremacy in immigration enforcement. Behind the legal and constitutional debates are thousands of detainees living in overcrowded cages, enduring extreme heat, limited medical care, and virtually no access to counsel. These conditions do more than violate constitutional guarantees: they are inflicting daily harm on vulnerable individuals.
The continued operation of the facility despite these reports illustrates the dangers of allowing immigration detention facilities to function without meaningful supervision. Without immediate intervention, detainees will continue to suffer in conditions that fall far outside the bounds of the law and basic human dignity.
[1] Chelsea Bailey, Isabel Rosales, & Alaa Elassar, ‘Alligator Alcatraz’: What to know about Florida’s new controversial migrant detention facility, CNN (July 13, 2025), https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/01/us/what-is-alligator-alcatraz-florida [https://perma.cc/CQN9-7PD2].
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] Id.
[5] Id.
[6] Alexis Tsoukalas, Top 5 Things to Know About SB 1718, Florida’s New Immigration Law, Fla. Pol’y Inst. (June 28, 2023), https://www.floridapolicy.org/posts/top-five-things-to-know-about-sb-1718-floridas-new-immigration-law [https://perma.cc/KB3X-PP6E].
[7] Id.
[8] The Federal 287(g) Program is named after Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and was codified as law in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996. This legislation was implemented to allow the federal government, through ICE, to partner with local law enforcement, effectively turning local police into immigration agents.
[9] Delegation of Immigration Authority Section 287(g) Immigration and Nationality Act, U.S. Immigr. and Customs Enf’t (Oct. 1, 2025), https://www.ice.gov/identify-and-arrest/287g [https://perma.cc/PB4Q-2A8K] [hereinafter Section 287(g)].
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Id.
[13] Florida’s Secretive Immigration Detention Center, Explained, ACLU Or. (Aug. 15, 2025), https://www.aclu-or.org/news/floridas-secretive-immigration-detention-center-explained/ [https://perma.cc/US5E-MQ6M] [hereinafter ACLU Or.].
[14] Glenna Milberg, DeSantis defends ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ as work continues on Everglades migrant facility, Loc. 10 News (June 26, 2025), https://www.local10.com/news/local/2025/06/25/desantis-defends-alligator-alcatraz-as-work-continues-on-everglades-migrant-facility/ [https://perma.cc/GS8D-QJVQ].
[15] Governor Ron DeSantis Announces Expansion of Florida’s Capacity to Detain and Deport Illegal Aliens, Exec. Off. of Governor Ron DeSantis, 46th Governor of Fla. (Aug. 14, 2025), https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2025/governor-ron-desantis-announces-expansion-floridas-capacity-detain-and-deport [https://perma.cc/JF9Y-ZS5N].
[16] Governor Ron DeSantis Announces Additional Memoranda of Agreement Between Florida Law Enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Exec. Off. of Governor Ron DeSantis, 46th Governor of Fla. (Feb. 19, 2025), https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2025/governor-ron-desantis-announces-additional-memoranda-agreement-between-florida-law [https://perma.cc/95R5-2EHS].
[17] Id.
[18] Bailey et al., supra note 1.
[19] Nicole Sganga, Kristi Noem says “Alligator Alcatraz” to be model for ICE state-run detention centers, CBS News (Aug. 4, 2025), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alligator-alcatraz-model-kristi-noem-homeland-security/ [https://perma.cc/E7QR-WZLK].
[20] ACLU Or., supra note 13.
[21] Immigration Detention May Constitute Torture & Ill-Treatment, Ctr. for Victims of Torture (July 21, 2023), https://www.cvt.org/what-we-do/project-archive/immigration-detention-must-end/immigration-detention-may-constitute-torture-ill-treatment/ [https://perma.cc/UW57-5ZZQ].
[22] Bailey et al., supra note 1.
[23] ACLU Or., supra note 13.
[24] Id.
[25] M.A. v. Guthrie, No. 25-cv-00765 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2025).
[26] Shah, supra note 9.
[27] Id.
[28] Hatzel Vela, ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ detainees describe conditions at Everglades facility, NBC 6 S. Fla. (July 7, 2025), https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/detainee-being-held-at-alligator-alcatraz-describes-conditions-at-everglades-facility/3653144 [https://perma.cc/QAT9-Y5LD].
[29] Claudia Lauer, Senate report details dozens of cases of medical neglect in federal immigration detention centers, PBS News (Oct. 31, 2025), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/senate-report-details-dozens-of-cases-of-medical-neglect-in-federal-immigration-detention-centers [https://perma.cc/GT9X-9KWB].
[30] Id.
[31] Nathan S. Chapman & Kenji Yoshino, The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, Nat’l Const. Ctr., https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/amendment-xiv/clauses/701 [https://perma.cc/MA8U-MR4A] (last visited Nov. 17, 2025); ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ immigrant detainees are held without charges and barred from legal access, lawyers say, NBC News (July 28, 2025), https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/alligator-alcatraz-immigrant-detainees-legal-access-rcna221556 [https://perma.cc/2EG8-GR3A].
[32] Gretchen Frazee, What Constitutional Rights Do Undocumented Immigrants Have?, PBS News, (Jun. 25, 2018), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-constitutional-rights-do-undocumented-immigrants-have [https://perma.cc/DW3Y-5T8E}.
[33] Id.
[34] Hans von Spakovsky, Due Process and Aliens: What They Are and Are Not Entitled to in Immigration Proceedings, Heritage Found. (July 3, 2025), https://www.heritage.org/border-security/report/due-process-and-aliens-what-they-are-and-are-not-entitled-immigration [https://perma.cc/GX4F-4QQT].
[35] Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 690 (2001).
[36] Id.
[37] Bryan A. Stevenson & John F. Stinneford, The Eighth Amendment, Nat’l Const. Ctr., https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/amendments/amendment-viii/clauses/103 [https://perma.cc/YAM7-TCN5] (last visited Nov. 17, 2025).
[38] Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 828 (1994).
[39] Bailey et al., supra note 1.
[40] Bell v. Wilfish, 441 U.S. 520, 538-39 (1979).
[41] Bailey et al., supra note 1.
[42] Shah, supra note 9.
[43] Id.
[44] Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012).
[45] Shah, supra note 9.
[46] M.A. v. Guthrie, No. 25-cv-00765 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2025).
[47] Id.
[48] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, arts. 9-10 [hereinafter ICCPR].
[49] Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984, 1465 U.N.T.S. 85 [hereinafter CAT].
[50] U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, U.S. Treaty Status, U.N. Treaty Body Database, https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Treaty.aspx?CountryID=187&Lang=en [https://perma.cc/EG43-GXEM].
[51] Bailey et al., supra note 1.
[52] ICCPR, supra note 45; CAT, supra note 46.
[53] Bailey et al., supra note 1.
[54] Section 287(g), supra note 8.
[55] Peter Charalambous & Allison Pecorin, Democratic lawmakers demand information about ‘Alligator Alcatraz’, ABC News (Aug. 20, 2025), https://abcnews.go.com/US/democratic-lawmakers-demand-information-alligator-alcatraz/story?id=124780232 [https://perma.cc/7WNA-GY29].
[56] Rebecca Gambler, Immigration Detention: Ice Should Enhance Its Use of Facility Oversight Data and Management of Detainee Complaints, U.S. Gov’t Accountability Off. (Aug. 19, 2020), https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-596 [https://perma.cc/ZXA9-V6T4].
[57] Immigration and Nationality Act, Pub. L. No. 82-414, § 101, 66 Stat. 163, 167 (1952).
[58] U.S. Const. amend. XIV.
[59] Mike Schneider, ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ detainees held without charges, barred from legal access, attorneys say, PBS News (July 28, 2025), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/alligator-alcatraz-detainees-held-without-charges-barred-from-legal-access-attorneys-say [https://perma.cc/6XRS-5GGY].
[60] Id.
[61] Exec. Off. For Immigr. Rev., EOIR Policy Manual, Part V, Ch. 4.2, https://www.justice.gov/eoir/eoir-policy-manual/miscellaneous/chapter4-2 [https://perma.cc/HK5K-GTX4].
[62] 533 U.S. 678, 690 (2001).
[63] Joseph V. Cuffari, Summary of Unannounced Inspections of ICE Facilities Conducted in Fiscal Years 2020-2023, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec. Off. of Inspector Gen. (Sep. 24, 2024), https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2024-09/OIG-24-59-Sep24.pdf [https://perma.cc/F9FL-ELE5].
[64] The Associated Press, Florida must stop expanding ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ immigration center, judge says, NPR (Aug. 22, 2025), https://www.npr.org/2025/08/22/nx-s1-5510620/florida-alligator-alcatraz-immigration-ruling#:~:text=toggle%20caption,response%20to%20the%20judge’s%20ruling [https://perma.cc/T4NA-K8JQ].
[65] Id.
[66] Mike Schneider, Appeals court panel stops order to wind down ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ operations in Florida, PBS News (Sep. 4, 2025), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/appeals-court-panel-stops-order-to-wind-down-alligator-alcatraz-operations-in-florida [https://perma.cc/X356-V83F].
