Did ICE detain other postpartum women in 2025 and what were the outcomes?
Executive summary
Reporting from advocacy groups, national outlets and regional press documents multiple instances in 2025 of pregnant, postpartum and nursing people being detained by ICE, including at least one postpartum detention of a mother 15 days after giving birth (Nayra Guzmán) and several reported cases of postpartum medical harm and deportation (Alicia) [1] [2]. Data remain incomplete because Congress let lapse reporting requirements and ICE has stopped publicly reporting numbers, so independent outlets, lawsuits and advocacy interviews form the evidence base [3] [4].
1. What the reporting shows: documented postpartum detentions and outcomes
Multiple outlets and advocacy letters describe detained people who were postpartum in 2025 or detained shortly after delivery. The 19th reported that Nayra Guzmán was detained 15 days after a C‑section while her newborn was in a NICU and that she faced additional medical challenges, including Type 1 diabetes management, during detention [1]. Advocacy groups documented several cases — including a woman identified as “Alicia” — who miscarried while in custody, remained detained for months afterward, experienced severe infection and was ultimately deported, separating her from her children [2] [5]. The Independent and other outlets say these individual accounts add up to “dozens” of pregnant, postpartum and nursing people detained in 2025, according to advocates and nonprofit data-gathering [3].
2. Why precise counts are unavailable: reporting requirement lapse and ICE opacity
Congress required semiannual DHS reporting on pregnant, postpartum and nursing detainees through 2024; that statutory requirement was not renewed in 2025, and multiple outlets note ICE stopped publicly reporting the counts, making facilities a “black box” [3] [4]. Journalists and advocates therefore rely on lawsuits, court filings, letters to ICE, and interviews with detainees to identify cases rather than centralized official data [3] [6].
3. Policy context: an official restraint but conflicting practice
A Biden‑era directive since 2021 told ICE to avoid arresting or detaining people known to be pregnant, postpartum or nursing except in “exceptional circumstances,” and the 2025 National Detention Standards reiterate care obligations [7] [8]. Yet advocates and legal experts say ICE has continued detaining people in these categories under the Trump administration, with examples of arrests at check‑ins and short‑term holds that contravene the spirit of the guidance [9] [4].
4. Reported harms and legal responses
Reported harms include shackling, denied or delayed medical care, miscarriages while detained, postpartum infections, and family separations via deportation — allegations compiled in an ACLU letter and covered by major outlets [6] [10] [11]. Civil‑rights groups have filed letters and lawsuits and urged ICE to identify and release pregnant and postpartum detainees; in some cases lawyers secured release on bond (Antonia Aguilar Maldonano’s bond release is noted as an example) [4] [12].
5. Competing narratives and agency response
ICE and DHS have pushed back in public statements, calling prior reports “false” in some instances and disputing allegations of “subprime conditions,” while advocates say the agency’s denials conflict with multiple, similar survivor accounts [10]. Reporting notes both the departments’ formal policies to protect pregnant and postpartum people and their simultaneous denials or silence about specific allegations, producing a dispute between advocates and agency spokespeople [10] [7].
6. Geographic and facility patterns reported
Coverage singles out several facilities — including the Basile processing center in Louisiana and Stewart detention in Lumpkin, Georgia — where multiple pregnant or postpartum cases were reported, and mentions temporary processing sites (Broadview) where postpartum detainees said conditions were especially poor [2] [6] [1]. Advocates warn that short‑term processing facilities can lack the medical capacity of longer‑term centers, worsening postpartum risks [1].
7. Limits of current reporting and what’s not in the sources
Available reporting documents individual cases and advocates’ estimates but does not provide a verified national tally of postpartum detainees or a comprehensive list of outcomes [3] [4]. Official ICE aggregate numbers for 2025 are not available in the provided sources; therefore a definitive count or exhaustive outcome list is not found in current reporting [13] [3].
8. What to watch next and implications
Watch for congressional inquiries, renewed reporting requirements, court filings and further ACLU/Women’s Refugee Commission documentation; these are the primary avenues that have revealed cases so far and could produce verifiable totals or systemic findings [6] [3]. The pattern reported by multiple outlets raises questions about adherence to policy and the medical safety of detaining people during vulnerable postpartum periods — issues that will shape legal challenges and advocacy campaigns going forward [4] [9].
Limitations: this account relies exclusively on journalism, advocacy letters and partial official documents supplied in reporting; these sources agree on individual harms and systemic concern but do not provide a single, government‑verified national dataset for 2025 [3] [13].