Lawsuit Aims to Block Migrants’ Transfer to Guantanamo Bay

WASHINGTON — Civil rights attorneys filed a federal lawsuit Saturday seeking to prevent the Trump administration from transferring ten migrants detained in the U.S. to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This action marks a second legal challenge initiated in less than a month, during which the administration has plans to potentially detain up to 30,000 immigrants at the naval base for deportation.

The latest lawsuit is limited to the ten individuals facing possible transfer, while the previous case sought access for migrants already at the base. Both legal actions are backed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and were submitted in Washington.

At least 50 migrants have reportedly been transferred to Guantanamo Bay, with civil rights advocates estimating that the total could be around 200. They assert that this unprecedented move marks the first time in U.S. history that non-citizens are being held at Guantanamo for civil immigration charges, a facility traditionally reserved for individuals linked to terrorism and national security concerns.

President Trump has stated that Guantanamo Bay, colloquially known as “Gitmo,” has the capacity for approximately 30,000 immigrants who he labels as “the worst” or high-risk “criminal aliens.” However, the administration has not disclosed detailed information regarding the crimes the migrants are accused of, leaving uncertain whether those individuals are merely charged or have been previously convicted.

The ten men named in the lawsuit arrived in the U.S. between 2023 and 2024, hailing from several countries including Venezuela, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The lawsuit indicates that two Venezuelan men were subjected to torture by their government for their political beliefs, while others fled threats from the Taliban or persecution tied to their political affiliations.

“The purpose of this second Guantanamo lawsuit is to prevent more people from being illegally sent to this notorious prison, where the conditions have now been revealed to be inhumane,” said Lee Gelernt, an ACLU attorney and lead counsel on the case. “The lawsuit is not claiming they cannot be detained in U.S. facilities, but only that they cannot be sent to Guantanamo.”

The defendants in the case include the White House, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the Department of Homeland Security, among others. None of these agencies responded to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit.

The legal challenges argue that the transfers violate the migrants’ due process rights protected under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, the lawsuit emphasizes federal immigration law, which prohibits the transfer of non-Cuban migrants to Guantanamo Bay and insists that the U.S. government lacks authority to hold individuals outside U.S. territory.

Critics have highlighted that many of the migrants who have been sent to Guantanamo Bay do not possess serious criminal records. “The reason for doing so is solely to try to instill fear in the immigrant population,” the lawsuit stated. Gelernt added that Guantanamo Bay “does not have the infrastructure” to safely detain even a small number of migrants.

The original lawsuit filed by the ACLU on February 12 indicated that those already at Guantanamo have “effectively disappeared into a black box” with limited access to contact attorneys or family members. The Department of Homeland Security has claimed that detainees can access legal representation by phone.

In a separate case in New Mexico, a federal judge on February 9 blocked the transfer of three Venezuelan immigrants to Guantanamo. Their attorneys contended that these individuals had been wrongly accused of gang affiliations.

As the legal battle continues, Guantanamo Bay remains a focal point of controversy, representing a history of allegations of poor conditions for detainees. A report from the U.N. in 2023 acknowledged some improvements but noted ongoing “cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment” at the facility. The U.S. government has refuted much of the criticism, asserting agreements with the U.N. investigator regarding the conditions.