Hundreds of immigration detainees at the Delaney Hall ICE detention facility in Newark, New Jersey, launched a hunger and labor strike in mid-May 2026 to protest what they described as substandard conditions, including poor food quality, delayed or inadequate medical care, lack of air conditioning, and prolonged detention without timely case resolution. The strike, which entered its ninth day by the end of May, involved between 300 and 400 detainees at the 1,196-bed facility, which is privately operated by the GEO Group under a 15-year contract with ICE. At the time of reporting, federal data indicated the facility held approximately 908 detainees daily.

The strike triggered sustained protests outside the facility involving family members, activists, immigrant rights organizations, and public officials. Demonstrations escalated into repeated clashes between protesters and federal agents. ICE officers used pepper spray, batons, Tasers, and pepper ball projectiles against the crowd. Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey said he was caught in pepper spray while attempting to position himself between agents and protesters to calm tensions. Video showed Kim having his eyes flushed afterward. At least one protester was struck with a Taser on nearby train tracks and carried into the facility. A Guardian photographer observed at least seven journalists being pepper sprayed. Norma Bowe, a nurse, said she was shoved to the ground and hit her head while trying to assist another woman who had been dragged on the sidewalk. State police also fired teargas canisters and pepper ball pellets at protesters on at least one occasion and used officers on horseback to push the crowd back.

Authorities reported multiple arrests. Six protesters were arrested on May 24, two more on May 26 for assaulting, resisting, and impeding federal officers, and nine total during the broader period of clashes. The Department of Homeland Security stated that ICE officers were assaulted by protesters who sprayed law enforcement with an unknown chemical substance and that anyone who assaults law enforcement would be prosecuted. DHS said officers used the minimum amount of force necessary and that no individuals were directly struck by pepper ball projectiles.

Inside the facility, detainees and advocates reported serious conditions. A letter from detainees was published by advocates. Reports from those inside included inedible food containing worms or maggots, spoiled or congealed milk, a persistent flu outbreak, lice infestation, lack of air conditioning, and delayed medical care. Senator Kim said he spoke with detainees during a visit, including a pregnant woman who said she was not receiving needed obstetric care and a man with stage three lung cancer who said he could not get treatment. Amy Torres, executive director of the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, said conditions were severe enough to cause pregnancy losses. Selenia Destefani, managing attorney for Nova Law Group, said one client released from the facility was hospitalized with a stomach illness she attributed to food eaten at Delaney Hall. One hunger striker reportedly fainted inside the facility, and according to a former detainee identified as Luis, staff did not help him, so other detainees gave him water with salt and sugar. Advocates reported that Delaney Hall staff removed tablets from detainee units after the strike was announced, limiting communication with the outside world. Detainees and families also reported that guards pepper-sprayed and beat detainees, including an incident in which guards pepper-sprayed a group of detainees who tried to stop the removal of a fellow detainee who had been helping translate for the strikers.

The Department of Homeland Security and Secretary Markwayne Mullin denied the existence of a hunger strike and rejected claims about poor conditions. Mullin stated on social media that there was no hunger strike at Delaney Hall and that detainees receive three meals a day evaluated by certified dieticians, clean water, clothing, bedding, showers, soap, toiletries, and comprehensive medical, dental, and mental health services including 24-hour emergency care. DHS said all affected detainees from the reported altercation were evaluated by on-site medical personnel and cleared with no serious injuries. ICE detention standards, the agency said, are higher than most United States prisons that hold citizens. The GEO Group said its facilities comply with federal detention standards monitored by ICE, provide around-the-clock medical care, dietitian-approved meals, legal and family visitation, translation services, and recreational amenities, and are independently accredited by the American Correctional Association and the National Commission on Correctional Health Care.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill and Senator Kim attempted to visit the facility on May 25 and were initially denied entry. After eventually being allowed inside, Kim described the conditions he witnessed. Both Sherrill and Kim called for Delaney Hall to be shut down. Sherrill said the New Jersey Department of Health attempted to conduct a health inspection but was denied full access, raising serious questions about what ICE was trying to hide. DHS responded that four state health representatives inspected the food service department and that ICE facilities are regularly audited. On May 27, members of Congress including Representatives Jerrold Nadler, Dan Goldman, and Adriano Espaillat toured the facility, where detainees described contaminated food and inadequate medical care that lawmakers called inhumane. Governor Sherrill announced that state officials would take over policing outside the facility from ICE, establishing a protected peaceful protest zone, citing safety concerns and pointing to deadly events in Minneapolis earlier in the year. One of the strikers' main demands has been to meet with Governor Sherrill.

Hunger strikes were also reported at other GEO Group-operated ICE facilities. At the Desert View Annex in Adelanto, California, a 750-bed facility holding more than 400 detainees, at least 20 detainees launched a hunger strike demanding mold removal, safe drinking water, timely medical care for chronic conditions, and an end to what they described as reduced food portions designed to force commissary purchases. Eva Huerta, whose husband was transferred to the annex, said he was given two Tylenol tablets and two bags of salt to gargle with when he sought help for a cough and chest pain, and that his repeated requests for a lower bunk due to an elbow injury were ignored. Caleb Soto, an attorney for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said medical appointments can take weeks or months to be approved, often last about 60 seconds, and typically end with a prescription of Tylenol, Advil, or a salt packet. The Adelanto ICE Processing Center next door is at the center of a federal class-action lawsuit alleging mold, disease, medical neglect, and inadequate food and water. At least six people have died in ICE custody in California since the start of 2025, four at Adelanto and two at the Imperial Regional Detention Facility in Calexico. A California Department of Justice report found that conditions at immigration detention centers in the state have worsened. Hunger strikes were also reported at the North Lake Processing Center in Baldwin, Michigan, and the Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, where communication lines to the striking unit were reportedly cut.

ICE is required to disclose hunger strike data, but the latest figures posted were from February 11, 2026, showing seven detainees on hunger strike nationwide without specifying locations. Emergency records from two Texas facilities obtained by NBC News showed the severe effects hunger strikes can have, with multiple detainees found unresponsive, suffering acute abdominal pain, or showing symptoms of starvation. ICE considers a detainee to be on a hunger strike after missing nine meals or not eating for 72 hours or more.

The Delaney Hall facility sits in an industrial area of Newark and opened on May 1, 2025. ICE detention in New Jersey has been a source of political tension for years. The state passed a law in 2021 barring privately owned facilities from being used for immigration detention, but a lawsuit supported by the Biden administration led to the law being struck down. Since Delaney Hall reopened, it has been a repeated target of protest. Last May, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested after requesting entry, and US Representative LaMonica McIver was later charged with various crimes after a skirmish outside. In June, protesting detainees pushed down a wall inside and four escaped. In December, a Haitian man detained at Delaney Hall died of suspected natural causes. The GEO Group reported $300 million in annual revenue from its contracts with the federal government.

Original Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (newark) (california) (michigan) (pennsylvania) (protest) (detainees)

This article provides limited actionable information for a normal reader. The most concrete takeaway is that detainees at four ICE facilities are on hunger strikes to protest conditions, but the article does not tell a reader what to do about it. There are no instructions for contacting a representative, no links to the facilities' official policies, no guidance on how to file a complaint about detention conditions, and no steps for someone who wants to advocate for or against the situation. A reader who is moved by the claims in the article has no clear path to participation beyond being aware that the strikes are happening.

The educational depth is moderate. The article explains what is happening at each facility and who is involved, which is useful, but it does not explain how ICE detention standards are set, how private contractors like the GEO Group are held accountable, or how hunger strikes in detention facilities have been resolved in the past. The article mentions that the GEO Group holds a 15-year contract with ICE, but it does not explain how such contracts are awarded, what oversight mechanisms exist, or what recourse the public has if a contractor fails to meet standards. The reader learns the surface facts but does not gain a deeper understanding of the systems involved.

Personal relevance is significant for a specific group. The article is directly relevant to people who have family members or friends in ICE detention, to immigrants who may face detention, and to communities near the facilities mentioned. For those individuals, the conditions described could affect their safety, health, or legal rights. For the broader public, the relevance is more abstract, touching on general immigration policy and the treatment of detainees. A person who has no connection to the immigration system may not feel a personal connection, even though the underlying issues of human rights and government accountability affect everyone indirectly.

The public service function is present but narrow. The article raises awareness about conditions in ICE detention facilities and frames them as issues worthy of public discussion. It serves the public by naming specific complaints, such as unsafe drinking water, mold, and lack of medical care, which many readers may not have known about. However, the article does not provide safety guidance, emergency information, or practical steps for someone currently detained or for their families. It informs but does not equip the reader to act in their own interest beyond being aware that these issues exist.

Practical advice is essentially absent. The article does not tell a reader how to contact ICE about a specific facility, how to request information about a detained family member, how to file a formal complaint about conditions, or how to connect with advocacy organizations that work on these issues. The only implied action is to support the calls for oversight, but even that is not spelled out. A reader who wants to do something with this information is left to figure it out on their own.

The long term impact of reading this article is modest but potentially meaningful. A reader may come away with a better understanding that ICE detention involves private contractors and that conditions in these facilities are a matter of public debate. This awareness could influence how they vote, how they think about immigration policy, or how they engage with advocacy organizations. However, the article does not teach a framework for evaluating detention policy, understanding the legal rights of detainees, or advocating for change, so the lasting benefit is limited to general awareness rather than actionable knowledge.

The emotional and psychological impact is mixed in a concerning way. The article validates the experiences of detainees and their families, which can be affirming for those directly affected. The descriptions of tear gassing, beatings, and substandard conditions may help readers feel less alone in their concerns. At the same time, the article presents serious allegations without resolution, which could create a sense of frustration or helplessness. The tone is factual but leans heavily on one side of the story, and it does not offer coping strategies or emotional support for those currently struggling with the issues described. It does not harm the reader directly, but it also does not provide a constructive emotional outlet.

The article does not rely on clickbait or ad driven language. The tone is straightforward and grounded in reported claims. The claims are attributed to named sources, including family members, advocacy organizations, and government officials, and there is no exaggerated or repeated dramatic language designed to maintain attention through shock alone. The subject matter itself is compelling enough that the article does not need to inflate its importance. However, the article does present one side of the story more fully than the other, which shapes the reader's emotional response without necessarily being sensationalized.

The article misses several important chances to teach and guide. It does not explain how a person might contact their representative to express concern about detention conditions, how to find the text of ICE detention standards, or how to follow up on a denied health inspection. It does not provide context for how private prison contracts work in other contexts or in other countries. It does not explain what a reader can do right now to support detainees, such as how to connect with legal aid organizations or how to participate in advocacy campaigns. It also does not explain how ICE's statement was evaluated or what evidence supports or contradicts the claims made by detainees and their families.

Even without those specifics, a reader can take sensible steps when faced with similar news about detention conditions or government accountability issues. First, if a proposed policy or reported condition affects someone you know, a practical starting point is to write a short, clear email to your own representative stating the issue, your concern, and a specific request such as supporting an investigation or holding a hearing on the topic. Second, if you are trying to locate or support someone in detention, consider contacting organizations that provide legal aid to immigrants, because they often have direct channels to detention facilities and can help you understand your options. Third, if you want to evaluate claims made by any side of a dispute, look for independent investigations or reports from nonpartisan sources, because understanding the specific findings helps you evaluate whether the claims are supported by evidence. Fourth, if you are concerned about oversight of government contractors, review your state's laws on private detention facilities and consider attending public meetings where these issues are discussed, because local engagement often has more impact than national attention. Fifth, if you want to support systemic change, consider connecting with advocacy organizations that work on these issues long term, because sustained collective action tends to produce more lasting results than individual effort. These general practices help you stay informed, protect your interests, and participate in the policy process even when the original article provides no direct guidance.

The text uses strong words to push feelings against ICE and the GEO Group. The phrase "tear gassed and beaten by guards" is placed early and repeated, which makes the reader feel anger toward the guards before hearing any other side. The word "beaten" is a strong word that suggests cruelty, and the text does not include any explanation from the guards or ICE about why force was used. This helps the protesters and detainees by making them look like victims and hides any reason the guards might have had for their actions.

The text uses passive voice to hide who did what in some places. The phrase "have been tear gassed and beaten by guards" does name the guards, but other parts like "communication lines to the unit where the strike was taking place" leave out who cut the lines. The text says the Pennsylvania center "cut off communication lines" but does not say who at the center did it or why. This hides responsibility and makes it seem like the facility acted as a whole without any specific person or reason.

The text picks sources that all tell the same side of the story. Every person quoted, including Gabriela Fuentes, Haddy Gassama, Jasmine Rivera, Ruby Robinson, and Governor Mikie Sherrill, speaks against ICE or the detention facilities. No guard, no ICE agent, and no GEO Group worker is quoted giving their side. This one-sided selection of sources pushes the reader to see only the protesters' view and hides any other explanation.

The text uses ICE's own words against it in a way that makes ICE look like it is lying. The text says ICE called the accusations a "hoax" and then lists the complaints right after, which makes ICE's statement seem false or dismissive. The word "hoax" is a strong word that suggests the protesters are lying, and by placing the complaints right after, the text pushes the reader to believe the protesters and not ICE. This is a word trick because it sets up ICE's statement just to knock it down.

The text uses numbers in a way that makes the facilities sound very large and possibly overcrowded. The text says Delaney Hall is a "1,000-bed (approximately 3,048-capacity)" center, which is a big difference between beds and capacity. This contrast makes it sound like the facility holds far more people than it has beds for, which pushes the reader to think conditions are bad. The text does not explain why the capacity is so much higher than the number of beds, which leaves the reader to assume the worst.

The text uses emotional stories from family members to make the reader feel sympathy for detainees. Gabriela Fuentes says her husband "came to the United States from Guatemala on a work visa," which makes him sound like a hardworking person who followed the rules. This detail is meant to make the reader feel that he does not deserve to be treated badly. The text does not say if he broke any rules after arriving, which hides any reason he might be detained.

The text uses Haddy Gassama's words to make the hunger strikes seem like the only option left. She says hunger strikes are "a tool people use when they feel they have no other options," which makes the detainees look desperate and powerless. This phrase pushes the reader to believe the system is broken and that the detainees have no other way to be heard. It hides any other steps the detainees might have taken or any process they could use.

The text uses Governor Mikie Sherrill's words to make ICE look like it is hiding something. She says that refusing full access "raises serious questions about what ICE is trying to hide." The phrase "trying to hide" suggests that ICE has something bad to cover up, even though the text does not prove what is being hidden. This is a word trick because it turns a denied inspection into proof of wrongdoing without showing what is actually inside the facility.

The text uses the phrase "detention system that is falling apart" to make the whole system sound broken. This is a strong phrase that pushes the reader to believe every ICE facility is bad, not just the ones mentioned. It is said by Haddy Gassama, and the text does not include anyone who says the system is working well. This one-sided claim hides any parts of the system that might be functioning properly.

The text uses ICE's statement about its standards being "higher than most United States prisons" to make ICE look defensive. By including this claim right after listing complaints, the text makes ICE seem like it is bragging while people suffer. The text does not check or support this claim, which leaves the reader to think ICE is either lying or missing the point. This word trick makes ICE's defense look weak and out of touch.

The text uses the phrase "substandard conditions" without defining what standard is being used. The word "substandard" means below a standard, but the text does not say whose standard or what the standard is. This lets the reader assume the worst without proof. The complaints about "unsafe drinking water" and "mold" are serious, but the text does not say if any test proved the water is unsafe or if mold was found by an inspector.

The text uses the order of information to push the reader toward one side. It starts with the hunger strikes and protests, then gives the complaints, then adds the emotional stories, and ends with calls for oversight and shutdown. ICE's defense is placed in the middle, surrounded by negative claims. This order makes ICE's statement feel like a small, weak response surrounded by strong accusations.

The text uses Ruby Robinson's words to suggest there is almost no oversight. She says "beyond visits from members of Congress, there is little oversight in place." This phrase makes it sound like nobody is watching these facilities, which pushes the reader to believe anything could be happening inside. The text does not mention any other oversight that might exist, such as internal inspections or legal reviews, which hides any checks that might already be in place.

The text uses the phrase "ongoing hunger and labor strike" to make the protest sound serious and organized. The word "ongoing" suggests this has been happening for a while, and "labor strike" suggests the detainees are refusing to work, which adds to the sense of disruption. This helps the protesters by making their action seem big and important, and it puts pressure on ICE by showing that many people are involved.

The text uses the phrase "daily protests have erupted outside the facility" to make the situation sound chaotic. The word "erupted" is a strong word that suggests sudden, uncontrollable action, like a volcano. This pushes the reader to think the situation is getting worse and that many people are angry. It helps the protesters by showing public support and makes ICE look like it is under siege.

The text uses the phrase "families of those detained say their relatives have been tear gassed and beaten" to show the claims come from families, not just the detainees. This makes the claims seem more trustworthy because families are seen as outside observers who care about their loved ones. However, the text does not include any proof or investigation that supports these claims, which means the reader must take the families' word without checking.

The text uses the phrase "ICE issued a statement dismissing the accusations" to make ICE sound cold and uncaring. The word "dismissing" suggests ICE did not take the complaints seriously, which pushes the reader to think ICE does not care about the detainees. This word choice helps the protesters by making ICE look heartless and hides any effort ICE might have made to investigate the claims.

The text uses the phrase "certified dieticians evaluate meals" from ICE's statement to make ICE sound technical and impersonal. While this sounds like a good thing, placing it right after complaints about spoiled milk and lack of medical care makes it seem like ICE is focusing on the wrong things. This word trick makes ICE's defense look out of touch with the real problems the detainees are describing.

The text uses the phrase "nearly 1,900 (approximately 5,791)" for Moshannon Valley to show a big gap between two numbers, just like it did for Delaney Hall. This pattern of showing a big difference between beds and capacity is used more than once, which pushes the reader to think these facilities are overcrowded. The text does not explain why the numbers are so different, which hides the real reason and lets the reader assume the worst.

The text uses the phrase "largest in the Midwest" and "largest in the Northeast" to make the Michigan and Pennsylvania facilities sound very big. This pushes the reader to think the hunger strikes are happening in major facilities, which makes the problem seem widespread. It helps the protesters by showing this is not just one small facility but a big, regional issue.

The text uses the phrase "at least 20 detainees launched a hunger strike" for the California facility. The words "at least" suggest there could be more, which makes the problem seem bigger than the number shows. This is a word trick because it hints at a larger issue without proving it. It helps the protesters by making the strike seem like it might be growing.

The text uses the phrase "ICE detention facilities" and "private security company" to remind the reader that a for-profit company runs these places. The GEO Group is mentioned as a "private security company" with a "15-year contract," which pushes the reader to think the company is making money from detaining people. This helps the protesters by suggesting the company might cut costs to increase profits, which could explain the bad conditions.

The text uses the phrase "15-year contract" to make the GEO Group's deal with ICE sound very long and possibly too cozy. A 15-year contract is a long time, and the text does not say if other companies could bid for the contract or if the GEO Group faces competition. This pushes the reader to think the GEO Group has a secure, profitable deal and might not need to keep high standards to keep it.

The text uses the phrase "refusing full access raises serious questions" to turn a denied inspection into a sign of guilt. Governor Sherrill's words suggest that if ICE had nothing to hide, it would allow full access. This is a word trick because it assumes that denying access means something bad is happening, even though there could be other reasons, like security or ongoing operations. It helps the protesters by making ICE look suspicious without proving what is being hidden.

The text uses the phrase "what ICE is trying to hide" to suggest ICE has a secret. This is a strong phrase that pushes the reader to think ICE is guilty of something. The text does not say what is being hidden or prove that anything is being hidden. This word trick helps the protesters by making ICE look bad without showing any real evidence.

The text uses the phrase "calls for more state oversight" to suggest that the current oversight is not enough. Ruby Robinson's words push the reader to think nobody is watching these facilities and that the state should step in. This helps the protesters by supporting their demand for change and hides any oversight that might already exist at the federal level.

The text uses the phrase "cut off communication lines to the unit where the strike was taking place" to make the Pennsylvania facility look like it is silencing the protesters. The text does not say why the lines were cut or if they were cut for safety reasons. This pushes the reader to think the facility is hiding the strike and stopping the detainees from telling their story. It helps the protesters by making the facility look like it is covering up the problem.

The text uses the phrase "it has been difficult to determine the scope of the hunger strikes" to suggest the facility is hiding information. Jasmine Rivera's words make it sound like the facility is blocking outside groups from knowing what is happening. This helps the protesters by making the facility look secretive and pushes the reader to think the problem is bigger than anyone knows.

The text uses the phrase "ICE hoax statement" in the summary to make ICE's response sound false. The word "hoax" is repeated from ICE's own statement, but using it in the summary makes it sound like the text agrees that ICE is lying. This is a word trick because it takes ICE's word and turns it against them, pushing the reader to side with the protesters.

The text uses the phrase "protest the conditions in which they are being held" to frame the detainees as people standing up for their rights. The word "protest" makes their action sound brave and justified, which helps the detainees by making them look like they are fighting for something important. It pushes the reader to support their cause and see them as victims of a bad system.

The text about hunger strikes at ICE detention facilities carries several meaningful emotions that shape how the reader understands the situation. The most prominent emotion is anger, which appears strongly in the descriptions of guards tear gassing and beating detainees. The word "beaten" is a powerful word that makes the reader feel upset and outraged on behalf of the people inside the facilities. This anger is directed at the guards and the system, and it serves to make the reader side with the detainees and their families. The anger is strong because it is repeated and placed early in the text, which means the reader starts feeling upset before hearing any other side of the story.

Fear is another emotion that runs through the text. The families of detainees are described as being unable to communicate with their loved ones because the Pennsylvania facility cut off communication lines. This creates a sense of worry and helplessness, as if the people inside are being hidden away where no one can see what is happening to them. The word "cut off" suggests something sudden and harsh, which makes the reader feel that the facility is doing something wrong on purpose. This fear serves to make the reader distrust the facilities and want someone to step in and check on the detainees.

Sadness appears in the personal story of Gabriela Fuentes, whose husband came to the United States from Guatemala on a work visa. The detail about the work visa is meant to make the reader feel that he is a good person who followed the rules, which makes his treatment seem even more unfair. This sadness is moderate in strength and serves to humanize the detainees, turning them from abstract numbers into real people with families who care about them. The reader is meant to feel sympathy for Gabriela and her husband, which pushes the reader to support the protesters outside the facility.

Desperation is a strong emotion expressed through the words of Haddy Gassama, who says hunger strikes are "a tool people use when they feel they have no other options." This phrase carries a heavy emotional weight because it suggests that the detainees have tried everything else and have been left with no choice but to stop eating. The word "desperate" is not used directly, but the idea is clear, and it serves to make the reader feel that the situation is very serious and that the system is failing. This desperation pushes the reader to believe that something must be done to fix the problem.

Distrust is woven throughout the text, particularly in the words of Governor Mikie Sherrill, who says that refusing full access to the facility "raises serious questions about what ICE is trying to hide." The phrase "trying to hide" is emotionally charged because it suggests that ICE has something bad to cover up. This distrust is strong and serves to make the reader question ICE's honesty and motives. The reader is meant to feel that if ICE had nothing to hide, it would allow inspectors in, and the refusal to do so is treated as proof that something is wrong.

Frustration appears in the words of Jasmine Rivera, who says it has been difficult to determine the scope of the hunger strikes because communication lines were cut. This frustration is moderate and serves to show that even people who are trying to help are being blocked. The reader is meant to feel annoyed on behalf of Rivera and other advocates who are trying to find out the truth but are being stopped. This frustration adds to the sense that the facilities are not being open and that the people in charge are making it hard for others to know what is really going on.

The text also carries a sense of urgency through the phrase "ongoing hunger and labor strike." The word "ongoing" suggests that this is not a one-time event but something that is still happening, which makes the reader feel that action is needed right now. This urgency is moderate in strength and serves to push the reader to pay attention and care about the situation while it is still unfolding. The reader is meant to feel that this is not a problem that can wait.

The writer uses several tools to increase the emotional impact of the text. One tool is the use of personal stories, like that of Gabriela Fuentes, which turns a large, complex issue into something the reader can feel connected to. By focusing on one person and her husband, the writer makes the problem feel real and immediate rather than abstract. Another tool is the repetition of strong words like "tear gassed" and "beaten," which keeps the reader's attention on the harsh treatment of detainees and builds a sense of outrage. The writer also uses contrasts, such as placing ICE's statement about high standards right after descriptions of bad conditions, which makes ICE's words seem out of touch and untrustworthy. The use of specific numbers, like the capacity of each facility, makes the problem feel large and widespread, which increases the reader's sense of concern.

The emotions in the text work together to guide the reader toward a particular reaction. The anger and fear make the reader feel that the situation is wrong and that the people inside the facilities are being treated badly. The sadness and desperation make the reader feel sympathy for the detainees and their families, which pushes the reader to support calls for change. The distrust and frustration make the reader question ICE's honesty and want more oversight and transparency. The urgency pushes the reader to feel that this is a problem that needs to be addressed now, not later. Overall, the emotions are used to build sympathy for the detainees, create worry about the conditions in the facilities, and inspire the reader to support calls for oversight and reform. The writer's careful choice of words and emotional cues ensures that the reader comes away feeling that the situation is serious, that the detainees are suffering, and that something needs to be done.