(BALTIMORE) Maryland’s congressional delegation, including Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representatives Kweisi Mfume and Sarah Elfreth, entered the Baltimore ICE facility inside the George H. Fallon Federal Building on August 13, 2025, two weeks after officials turned them away. The visit followed growing complaints that people were being kept for days in a site meant only for short stays, and a federal class-action lawsuit describing “inhumane” conditions.
ICE says the Baltimore site is a holding room, not a detention center, and that it follows agency policy. Agency officials also say basic medical help is available and that people are sent to hospitals in emergencies. But after touring the building, the lawmakers said the facility looked and operated like a detention center, with overcrowding, a lack of beds, thin food services, and gaps in medical care.

They reported an average stay of about 72 hours, with some people held up to eight days, far beyond the 12-hour limit that applies to holding rooms. In March, staff for the same offices saw an average of 36 hours, making the August numbers a sharp escalation.
The group said they were not allowed to speak with people held at the Baltimore ICE facility during the visit. ICE cited Maryland law for that restriction. Senator Van Hollen disputed ICE’s reading of state law and said Congressmembers should be able to speak with detainees during official oversight. After leaving, the delegation said they had “more questions than we came in with.” ICE pledged to answer 20 to 25 specific issues raised by the lawmakers in the coming days.
Lawmakers Gain Access After Earlier Denial
On July 28, 2025, the same lawmakers were denied entry, which ICE attributed to a lack of advance notice and concerns about the safety of people in custody and employees. DHS guidance requires that Members of Congress schedule visits in advance, and agency rules can limit photography and direct interviews while a tour is underway.
According to the delegation, those restrictions do not block follow-up interviews or written questions, and they should not prevent face-to-face conversations that respect privacy and security.
During the August 13 visit, the lawmakers said the rooms appeared to be used for longer stays than policy allows, with people sleeping on benches or on the floor. They described a system strained by transfers and delays, where staff were trying to manage overflow in a place that lacks the basic features of a detention center.
“This is not what ICE describes on paper,” Senator Van Hollen said, calling the situation “a gross abuse of power by a lawless president and his cronies.”
Representative Mfume added: “We just want answers, we want the truth, the facts, and we want to find a way to make sure that’s public and transparent.”
ICE maintains that the Baltimore site is not covered by the 2011 Performance-Based National Detention Standards because it is not a detention facility. Those standards govern matters like housing, medical care, and food service at detention centers.
Advocates and some legal experts counter that if a holding room is used as a detention center in practice, it should be treated as one in law and policy. Readers can review the detention standards on ICE’s site here: ICE 2011 Performance-Based National Detention Standards.
The lawmakers’ visit came amid reports from March of overcrowding, limited medical staff, and inadequate food, which helped prompt the push for direct oversight. Their stop in Baltimore is part of a broader review by Maryland’s delegation into how ICE uses holding rooms across the state and how long people stay in them during transfer or processing.
Legal Fights and Policy Stakes
A class-action lawsuit filed in June 2025 by the Amica Center and the National Immigration Project alleges that ICE keeps people at the Baltimore holding rooms for far longer than allowed and under conditions that harm their health. The Department of Justice disputes the claims.
Separately, in late July, 12 Democratic lawmakers sued the administration of President Trump, arguing the White House and federal agencies are limiting congressional access to immigration detention sites. Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) is among the leaders of that case.
At the Baltimore ICE facility, the central question is whether a site designed for very short stays is being used as a de facto detention center. ICE says the site is a temporary stop where people are processed and moved quickly. Lawmakers and advocates say the numbers tell a different story: hours turning into days, and in some cases a full week or more, inside small rooms not built for sleeping, medical care, or long waits.
Risks for people in custody
Short-term sites usually lack beds, showers, and full medical coverage. When a stay stretches past a day or two, these gaps can lead to:
- Dehydration
- Untreated symptoms
- Missed calls to family or lawyers
Parents and spouses often call offices across Maryland for help reaching loved ones, only to learn that a person has already been moved—sometimes more than once—making regular contact harder.
Possible Outcomes and Oversight Paths
According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, sustained pressure from Congress and ongoing court cases can produce several changes:
- Adjusted intake and transfer timelines
- Improved record-keeping on length of stay
- Expanded oversight of sites not meant for long-term use
If the courts side with plaintiffs, ICE could face orders to change operations at holding rooms in Baltimore and beyond. If Congress passes new rules, oversight visits could become more frequent and more open to direct interviews.
DHS officials have said lawmakers should follow a standard process for tours:
- Schedule at least one week in advance.
- Follow site rules on photos and interviews during the visit.
- Submit written questions to seek more details after leaving the facility.
Advocacy groups—including the Amica Center, National Immigration Project, and CASA—continue to gather declarations from people held in the Baltimore site. They point to the lack of on-site medical staff, limited food options, and the use of holding rooms for days at a time. ICE responds that safety comes first, that medical help is available, and that hospitals are used when needed.
What Comes Next
Several tracks will determine the outcome:
- ICE’s written responses to the Maryland delegation’s questions (promised after the visit).
- The class-action case, which will test whether the 12-hour cap for holding rooms can be enforced when a site operates beyond that limit in practice.
- The separate suit by members of Congress against President Trump’s administration, which could change access rules for oversight visits.
For now, the Baltimore delegation says it will keep pressing for transparency. Constituents with concerns are urged to contact the offices of Chris Van Hollen, Kweisi Mfume, and Sarah Elfreth, or the ICE Baltimore Field Office through official channels.
Families trying to track loved ones in custody should keep these details ready for calls with offices or legal aid groups:
- Full name
- Date of birth
- Country of birth
- A-number (if known)
Lawyers say those details can speed up checks on transfers and help schedule legal calls before a move occurs.
As the spotlight remains on the Baltimore ICE facility, the stakes are plain: if people continue to spend days in a place meant for hours, questions about legality, safety, and dignity will only grow. If ICE reduces stays to the 12-hour window and expands transparency for Congress, pressure could ease. Either way, the record from August 13, 2025 gives Maryland’s delegation fresh footing—and a timeline—to measure real change.
This Article in a Nutshell
Maryland lawmakers inspected Baltimore’s ICE holding room on August 13, 2025, finding 72-hour average stays, overcrowding, limited food, and medical gaps. ICE insists it’s a temporary holding room under policy. Lawmakers demand answers, legal groups sue, and oversight plus potential court rulings may force operational changes statewide.