Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What is the official number of missing persons from Alligator Alcatraz?
Executive Summary
Two authoritative accounts conflict: a Miami Herald investigation found that two-thirds of more than 1,800 detainees associated with “Alligator Alcatraz” could not be located in ICE’s online detention locator, while the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) replied that no one is unaccounted for and called claims about the facility a “hoax.” The available public record contains no single, independently verified “official number” of missing persons; the DHS position is that zero detainees are unaccounted in the ICE locator, while the Miami Herald reports substantial gaps in that same system [1].
1. What reporters found that provoked alarm: gaps in ICE’s public roster
The Miami Herald’s investigation documented precise counts: researchers traced more than 1,800 detainees tied to the facility nicknamed “Alligator Alcatraz” and found about 800 detainees with no record at all in ICE’s online detention locator and over 450 detainees listed with no location. That analysis treated the online locator as the primary public accountability tool and flagged that the scale of absent records represented systemic opacity rather than isolated errors. The Herald published these findings on September 25, 2025, and framed them as evidence that detainees could not be accounted for via the agency’s public database [1].
2. The government’s counterclaim: DHS says the records show nobody missing
DHS responded directly to the Herald’s reporting by stating that “No one is unaccounted — including at Alligator Alcatraz — in ICE’s online detention locator system,” and characterized public claims about the facility as a “hoax.” The agency’s reply asserts the ICE online locator as the authoritative repository for detainee status and implies that discrepancies identified by reporters do not constitute true missing-person cases under DHS’s operational definitions. This formal denial establishes the official administrative position that the number of missing detainees is zero according to agency records [1].
3. Two narratives, one database: why the disagreement centers on the ICE locator
Both the Herald’s findings and DHS’s denial hinge on the ICE online detention locator as the evidentiary baseline. The Herald’s count treats absence from the locator as a meaningful gap needing explanation; DHS treats the locator as definitive and claims no gaps exist. The dispute therefore is not about two separate datasets but about whether the locator accurately reflects detainee movements and custody status; the Herald’s analysis implies practical failures in that public tool, while DHS rejects that implication and insists the tool shows full accountability [1].
4. What the other provided sources add — and what they don’t
Two additional items in the provided dataset were assessed and found not to contain substantive information on “Alligator Alcatraz” or missing detainees; those sources instead focused on unrelated topics such as cookie policies and general news roundups and did not alter the factual dispute between the Herald and DHS. Their inclusion underscores that the public record provided here is narrow: the main factual tension remains between the Herald’s investigative counts and the DHS formal statement [2] [3].
5. Precise numerical claims and their implications for an “official” number
The Herald’s numerical claim—more than 1,800 detainees reviewed, roughly 800 with no ICE-locator record, and over 450 with no listed location—constitutes an empirical tally derived from the outlet’s investigation and implies many individuals could not be traced via the public tool. DHS’s assertion that “no one is unaccounted” in the same public tool functions as the agency’s official figure: in administrative terms, the official count of missing detainees is zero, because DHS affirms the locator shows all individuals accounted for. These are incompatible factual claims about the same dataset [1].
6. Limits of what the sources establish and what remains unknown
The sources establish a head-to-head factual disagreement without independent third-party resolution in the provided materials. The Herald documents a data gap in the public locator; DHS denies a gap exists. Absent additional records—such as internal ICE transfer logs, release paperwork, or a neutral audit of the locator—the question of why the Herald’s checklist and DHS’s records diverge cannot be resolved from the materials provided. The public record here does not supply an independent verification of detainee whereabouts beyond the contrasting claims [1].
7. Bottom line: there is no single verified “official number” beyond DHS’s assertion
If one equates “official number” with the government’s formal statement, DHS has provided the official figure: zero detainees unaccounted for in ICE’s online locator. If one equates “official number” with independent verification or investigative counting, the Miami Herald’s tally suggests a far larger problem—two-thirds of the reviewed cohort could not be confirmed via the public database. Both positions are documented in the record, and they are mutually exclusive; the present documents do not reconcile them [1].
8. What to watch next to confirm or refute the competing claims
Resolution requires additional, dated documentation such as agency transfer logs, release and removal records, or an independent audit of ICE’s locator updates. Public follow-up reporting, DHS-provided bulk data exports, or Freedom of Information Act disclosures would provide verifiable evidence to confirm whether the Herald’s unlocated counts reflect real custodial gaps or reporting/technical mismatches. The two existing sources frame the dispute and set the factual question for further verification [1] [2] [3].