People In Immigration Custody Have Complex Medical Needs The Trump Admin Isn’t Paying For

This week, we released previously undisclosed data on more than 233,000 claims for offsite medical care provided to people in immigration detention, which provides a snapshot into the serious healthcare needs that people face while in custody. The data raises urgent questions about whether the Trump administration is meeting its obligation to provide adequate medical care to people in immigration detention, since it has not reimbursed offsite providers for care since October 2025. It was first reported on by the Los Angeles Times. 

A significant amount of medical care for people held in immigration detention occurs “offsite,” in locations such as hospitals, rather than in detention facilities themselves. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) processed medical claims for offsite care given to people held by Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Health Service Corps (IHSC) until last fall, when the VA abruptly announced it would stop processing those claims. Since ICE has no system to process or pay medical claims, the VA’s decision created — in ICE’s words — an “absolute emergency,” putting the “health, welfare, and lives” of people in immigration custody “significantly at risk.” ICE even warned that the abrupt termination could “delay critical medical care” and lead to “medical complications or loss of life.”

The claims in the records we obtained cover treatments for serious medical conditions including heart attacks, strokes, traumatic brain injuries, mental health crises, infectious diseases like tuberculosis and HIV, pregnancy-related care, starvation, and many others. In addition to the human cost of these injuries and illnesses, treatment for these conditions — which may have been caused or worsened by unsafe detention conditions — cost taxpayers millions of dollars. 

“A federal government that chooses to deprive people of their liberty must also assume responsibility for providing adequate health care,” said our Executive Director Chioma Chukwu. “These records raise urgent questions about whether it is meeting that obligation.”

Blanche’s AG nomination advances to full Senate

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance Todd Blanche’s nomination for Attorney General to the full Senate this week, and his final confirmation vote could be as soon as this afternoon.

Blanche’s nomination had been stalled over multiple senators’ concerns about the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund. Holdouts Sens. John Cornyn and Thom Tillis confirmed they would vote to advance Blanche’s nomination on Monday, after Blanche signed a memo rescinding the fund and the Department of Justice (DOJ) agreed to clarify the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) protections granted to President Trump and his family.

We have concerns about whether Blanche — who is President Donald Trump’s former personal defense attorney — is capable of leading DOJ independently, or if he will use his power to shield Trump from investigations or to target the president’s opponents.

We recently obtained emails — first reported by the New York Times — that show Blanche oversaw DOJ’s Weaponization Working Group, assigned senior DOJ officials to politically charged investigations, and convened recurring meetings to monitor the group’s work. We are also still in active litigation to find out more about his role in DOJ’s review of records related to Jeffrey Epstein, and the effort to bury the second volume of Smith’s report concerning Trump’s handling of classified records. 

The public needs to know if Blanche is capable of serving as the nation’s top law enforcement officer with the kind of impartiality that Americans need and deserve, or if he will continue to think of himself as the president’s lawyer.

A major victory for transparency at the Department of Energy

This week, a federal court struck down a Department of Energy policy that could have closed thousands of pending Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, blocking an unlawful attempt by the Trump administration to evade its obligations under FOIA by shifting the burden of keeping public records requests open onto the public.

The court granted a summary judgement in our favor, ruling that the Energy Department exceeded its constitutional authority when it imposed a blanket requirement giving requesters with older FOIA requests just 30 days to reaffirm their interest or risk having their requests closed, regardless of how long the agency had delayed responding.

Our Executive Director Chioma Chukwu called the ruling “a victory for transparency, accountability, and the public’s right to know,” and added, “FOIA exists to ensure the public can access the truth, not to give agencies new ways to bury it. Had DOE’s policy been allowed to stand, it could have become a blueprint for agencies across the federal government to evade their obligations under FOIA by shifting unnecessary burdens onto requesters.”

American Oversight in the news

• ICE’s healthcare payment system collapsed. Are detainees still getting off-site care? (Los Angeles Times)
• Election denier Cleta Mitchell granted DHS elections official Heather Honey a lot of money (Democracy Docket)
• Judge throws out DOE’s blanket ‘still interested’ FOIA policy (Federal News Network)

Other stories we’re following

• Senate panel holds Fauci in contempt of Congress (New York Times)
• How ICE is weaponizing social media against its critics (Wall Street Journal)
• Democratic-led states sue to block Trump’s latest wave of tariffs (Politico)
• ICE threatens sheriffs with prosecution over access to inmates (New York Times)
• Transgender federal workers sue government over health care cuts (Washington Post)