NY judge hears of ‘appalling’ ICE detention conditions at 26 Federal Plaza 57%

By Molly Crane-Newman0%

5/27/2026, 11:09:33 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 63.2% saturation with 479 hits. Analysis detected 1,815 faulty-reasoning hits from 758 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.4% and a BS Rank of 57% (9,114 of 21,182 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.00% of the article peer group.

New Yorkers were left to languish at 26 Federal Plaza in severely overcrowded holding cells for days on end in conditions so abhorrent they made ICE personnel recoil, according to evidence presented Wednesday to a Manhattan judge weighing permanent protections for immigrants at the facility. 
“The hygiene conditions were appalling. 
I couldn’t bathe; there were no showers or toothbrushes. 
Plus, the toilets were in the same room  completely open  and there was no privacy whatsoever. 
We tried to cover the toilet with foil,” Carlos, among a group of detainees held in the building last summer, told reporters after the hearing. 
“It was freezing because the guards kept the air conditioning on all the time, even at night. 
There was no mattress or pillows,” he said, speaking in Spanish. 
“We slept directly on the floor.” 
The 27-year-old described facing torturous conditions after he was swept up by agents, saying Immigration and Customs Enforcement provided two meals daily, 12 hours apart, which “didn’t look fit for human consumption,” and limited water. 
Fluorescent lights blasting down from the ceilings were never turned off. 
The young man said he spent four days in one of the cells that ICE has claimed are used for “short-term confinement,” which the agency defines as less than a day. 
He estimated there were between 40 and 50 people in there with him, about double the cells’ maximum capacity. 
Carlos, who asked to be referred to by his first name, was one of several detainees whose testimony was presented in writing at a bench trial presided over by Judge Lewis Kaplan, along with ICE records laying bare crowded conditions and severe health hazards. 
As the Trump administration launched an aggressive crackdown on immigration last summer, the holding cells at 26 Federal Plaza, wedged between offices for the FBI, the Manhattan U.S. 
Attorney’s Office and other agencies, at one point held as many as 175 people  almost eight times their combined capacity, according to ICE data collected in the suit. 
Late last summer, Kaplan temporarily ordered ICE to clean up conditions, including by providing a safe sleeping space, nutritious meals, medication and access to lawyers. 
He’s considering whether to issue permanent protections. 
Heather Gregorio, a lawyer for the detainees who argued Wednesday, said the inhumane treatment was documented throughout agency records. 
“The evidence that we presented in court overwhelmingly shows that people have been held in horrific and often inhumane conditions,” she said. 
“There were people held there over the summer with all sorts of medical conditions, including heart attack risks, diabetes, seizures, tuberculosis, who did not receive care.” 
Internal correspondence presented in court showed New York-based ICE personnel expressing concern about people with contagious diseases and other illnesses being packed into holding cells. 
The correspondence was expected to be made public, along with photos of the secretive 10th floor of holding cells that ICE refused lawmakers access to for months. 
A judge in a separate Manhattan suit has temporarily barred ICE from carrying out arrests in most circumstances at the facility. 
That order came after the agency admitted it had provided false information to justify the arrest of people lawfully pursuing their right to seek asylum and lawful immigration status. 
Carlos was one of thousands of undocumented New Yorkers targeted last summer while following the rules by attending immigration court hearings. 
He had just been given the green light to return at a later date to continue his application when he learned a phalanx of agents lying in wait, wearing bulletproof vests and balaclavas, had other plans. 
“Several ICE agents surrounded me and arrested me in the hallway  just as I was walking out the door,” Carlos said, describing an upsetting scene in which agents knocked one of his sisters to the ground. 
The hastily conducted mass arrests led to several injuries, including a journalist who was carried out of 26 Federal Plaza on a stretcher in September after smacking his head on the floor as agents pursued two women trying to leave the building. 
“The whole experience was extremely distressing,” Carlos said, adding that during the chaos, ICE tried to trick him into signing off on his own removal from the U.S. 
“The agents lied to me and pressured me to sign a self-deportation form,” he said. 
“An officer told me that since my new hearing wasn’t until 2029, I would have to spend those years locked up. 
‘You’ll have to wait until then,’ he said. 
I felt deeply depressed.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.8%Molly Crane-Newman: 3.6%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Confirmation Bias12.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 14.4%Molly Crane-Newman: 2.8%newyorkdailynews: 3.3%Availability Heuristic14.4%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.6%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 9.3%newyorkdailynews: 6.1%Framing Effect10.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.6%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.9%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.9%This article: 7.5%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Pessimism Bias7.5%This article: 63.2%Molly Crane-Newman: 15.6%newyorkdailynews: 9.7%Negativity Bias63.2%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 2.1%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error2.2%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.9%newyorkdailynews: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.6%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 2.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 17.7%Molly Crane-Newman: 2.3%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Appeal to Authority17.7%This article: 2.8%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.1%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%False Dilemma2.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.7%Molly Crane-Newman: 3.2%newyorkdailynews: 4.1%Hasty Generalization8.7%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.8%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Bandwagon2.8%This article: 15.6%Molly Crane-Newman: 12.9%newyorkdailynews: 7.4%Appeal to Emotion15.6%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.8%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 17.8%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.4%newyorkdailynews: 3.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)17.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.6%Molly Crane-Newman: 2.3%newyorkdailynews: 2.6%Anecdotal10.6%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.9%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.9%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.4%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.8%newyorkdailynews: 2.2%Unattributed Quote14.4%This article: 6.6%Molly Crane-Newman: 1.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection6.6%This article: 19.8%Molly Crane-Newman: 6.4%newyorkdailynews: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice19.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.8%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 2.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Crane-Newman: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

758 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers36%attributed speech487writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageCarlos • 25 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 17 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 11 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageJudge Lewis Kaplan • 25 words • 0.0% coverageJudge Lewis Kaplan • 7 words • 0.0% coverageHeather Gregorio • 19 words • 0.0% coverageHeather Gregorio • 22 words • 100.0% coverageHeather Gregorio • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 28 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 15 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 21 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 8 words • 0.0% coverageCarlos • 4 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Heather Gregorio

100%flagged-word coverage
67 attributed words25% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Biased Writer Voice+6.6 ptsWriter: 26.3%Heather Gregorio: 32.8%32.8%Unattributed Quote-22.4 ptsWriter: 22.4%Heather Gregorio: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-10.3 ptsWriter: 10.3%Heather Gregorio: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -6.0 ptsWriter: 6.0%Heather Gregorio: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.