Yle tracked ICE's "dark" flights in Minnesota

ICE stands for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the US agency responsible for immigration detention and removals. In the report, ICE uses chartered passenger planes to move people it has detained. These flights matter because their routes and passengers can be difficult for families, lawyers, and the public to identify.

The report calls some flights “dark” when they are hard to trace, deliberately hidden, or poorly documented. Plane spotter Nick Benson follows private-flight operators and records arrivals and departures from a Minneapolis parking garage. He says flight information became harder to find after spring 2025. One Minneapolis flight had previously stopped in Texas and Nebraska before departing with detainees.

Benson publishes videos online, sometimes giving relatives their only view of detained loved ones. The report also describes people boarding with hands and feet restrained. ICE says it uses detention to ensure people attend immigration proceedings or removal, and it cites security and limited detention space as reasons for restraints and transfers.

Nick Benson’s observations indicate that nearly 5,000 people were flown from Minneapolis during 148 ICE flights in the year described. The figures show that the operation was not occasional. It involved a repeated charter-flight network moving large numbers of detained people through the airport.

The report does not provide a passenger count for every flight. It does describe one flight involving 28 detainees who were about to board after eight restrained people left the aircraft. That suggests planes may also be used for transfers before or after deportation-related journeys. Benson tracks aircraft movements, including arrival and departure times, rather than receiving official passenger manifests.

The flight total also changed over time. During the Metro Surge operation in the Minneapolis area, Benson observed two or three ICE flights from Minneapolis each day. Later, he reported two or three flights per week. The article presents this shift as evidence that enforcement intensity affected air-transport activity.

Transfers between states can change where a detainee is held while immigration proceedings continue. According to Nick Benson, the movement may make legal help harder to reach. He says some people are transferred away from their legal representatives or into states where their lawyers lack authorization to practice.

The report gives a concrete example at Minneapolis airport. Eight restrained people left a plane before 28 other detainees boarded. The aircraft had already traveled through Texas and Nebraska. This indicates that one charter flight can connect several detention locations, rather than simply carrying people from one city directly out of the country.

ICE gives different official reasons for these practices. The agency has cited limited detention capacity for transfers and security for the use of restraints. The report presents the legal-access concern as Benson’s assessment. If transfers continue, detainees may face greater difficulty preparing cases, contacting counsel, and keeping families informed.

When detainees are moved far from their lawyers or families, legal and personal support can become much harder to maintain. The report says transfers may place people in states where their lawyers cannot practice. That can delay communication, complicate case preparation, and force detainees to seek new representation or travel long distances.

The family impact can be severe. Benson says deportation decisions are not published, so spouses, parents, and children may have no information about a loved one’s location. He publishes videos because relatives may otherwise have no way to see detained family members. His recordings show people boarding aircraft while restrained.

The article also reports that Minnesota authorities discovered ICE had prevented thousands of detainees from meeting legal advisers earlier in the year. These barriers can make immigration proceedings less fair in practice, even when a formal hearing exists. Continued transfers could increase isolation and make mistakes or missed deadlines harder to correct.

The absence of a criminal conviction matters because immigration detention is being used on a scale that includes many people without criminal judgments. The report contrasts this reality with President Donald Trump’s campaign promise to deport criminal immigrants. It says ICE has also detained immigrants who have not committed crimes.

Trackrecords, described as an independent US research and data-collection institution, reported that about 65,000 people were in ICE custody in July. About 70% had no criminal conviction. The figures do not mean every detainee had no immigration violation; they show that most lacked a criminal conviction, a distinction important to understanding the scope of enforcement.

This raises questions about proportionality, family separation, and access to legal process. Detention can still occur in civil immigration cases, but people without criminal convictions may face restraints, transfers, and removal proceedings. The report’s wider concern is that detention practices and secrecy can affect people who are not being held because of criminal sentences.

In the United States, immigration detention is generally a civil measure, not punishment after a criminal conviction. The government may hold some noncitizens while deciding whether they can remain or while arranging removal. A removal case usually proceeds through immigration court, where the person can respond to the government’s allegations and raise defenses or protections allowed by law.

Due process generally means meaningful notice of the case and a fair opportunity to present evidence and arguments before an impartial decision-maker. People may have lawyers, but the government usually does not provide free counsel in immigration court. Detention can make representation difficult, especially when people are transferred far from their lawyers. Appeals or other court review may be available in some circumstances.

The article reports concerns that families lack information and that detainees were blocked from meeting legal advisers. Those claims matter because formal legal rights are less effective when people cannot contact counsel, understand proceedings, or prepare their cases. Exact rights depend on immigration status and the specific case.

Federal immigration authorities can question, arrest, and detain noncitizens when immigration law allows it. The government may seek removal if a person is inadmissible, deportable, or has violated immigration conditions. Detention can continue while an immigration case is decided or while a removal order is carried out. These powers are generally civil, even when detention feels like incarceration.

Limits are meant to protect people from arbitrary government action. Authorities must follow constitutional due-process requirements, provide legally required notices, and allow eligible people to present defenses or seek relief. Immigration judges and federal courts can review parts of the process. Some people may request bond, though detention can be mandatory in particular categories, and legal representation is usually private rather than government-funded.

The report highlights why these limits matter in practice. Transfers may separate detainees from counsel, while secrecy can leave families unaware of their location. ICE cites security and limited space, but detention and removal still must follow governing law. The exact protections depend on each person’s status and case.