Louisiana ICE facility draws opposition from immigration advocates and local residents

Alexandra Martinez

Aug 26, 2026

Share

Real journalists wrote and edited this (not AI)—independent, community-driven journalism survives because you back it. Donate to sustain Prism’s mission and the humans behind it.

A planned federal immigration facility at England Airpark in Central Louisiana is drawing opposition from immigrant rights advocates and community members who say the project would expand the use of detention for migrant families and children.

The 528-bed facility, being built in former military barracks near Alexandria International Airport, is intended to temporarily hold migrant families and unaccompanied children awaiting deportation flights. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) describes the site as a temporary “staging area” rather than a detention center, with stays expected to last roughly 72 hours. 

Immigration advocates interviewed by Prism dispute that characterization. They argued that people held at the facility would remain in federal custody and would not be free to leave, making the distinction between a staging facility and detention a matter of terminology.

“This facility is being very much falsely portrayed as a non-detention, non-carceral facility,” said Tania Wolf, Southeast Advocacy Manager at the National Immigration Project and a member of the Southeast Dignity Not Detention Coalition. “The reality is that it is and will be [detention].”

Francis Kelley, coordinator of Louisiana Advocates for Immigrants and Detention, also questioned whether a facility designed for short stays would remain temporary in practice.

England Airpark Executive Director Ralph Hennessy said in an emailed statement that there are no environmental hazards associated with this facility.

ICE did not immediately respond to Prism’s request for comment.

A new piece of a deportation hub

The proposed facility would sit alongside Alexandria International Airport, which has become a major hub for immigration enforcement flights.

According to data from Human Rights First’s ICE Flight Monitor analyzed by The Associated Press, more than 4,400 immigration enforcement flights arrived at or departed from Alexandria International Airport in 2025.

Supporters of the project say its location is intended to make the deportation process more efficient. Hennessy has said the facility would allow families awaiting removal flights to remain together, rather than being separated or moved to other locations. He has described the project as a humanitarian effort for people who have chosen to return to their home countries.

Hennessy has also said the project would generate about 200 jobs and more than $500,000 in annual rent for England Airpark.

For critics, however, the location is precisely the problem.

Wolf said Alexandria already functions as a major hub in the federal immigration enforcement system, with detainees moved to Louisiana from other parts of the country before being transferred or deported.

Adding a facility for families and children, she said, could allow the government to move those populations through the deportation process quicker while placing them farther from their communities and attorneys.

Questions over unaccompanied children

Under the federal system, unaccompanied immigrant children are generally placed in shelters and foster care programs overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement. The nonprofit arm of LaSalle Corrections, a private prison contractor, is expected to operate the Alexandria facility, according to AP.

In June, Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, asked the administration for more information about the facility, citing concerns about the treatment of unaccompanied children and environmental hazards at the former military site.

Environmental concerns at former military base

England Airpark was formerly England Air Force Base, and advocates say portions of the property carry contamination left from its military use.

Kelley said the land where the facility is being constructed was designated for industrial use and questioned whether it has been adequately evaluated for residential use, particularly for children.

Wolf shared these concerns. “These barracks were not meant for housing,” Wolf said. “The appropriate environmental studies specifically around those toxic forever chemicals have not been conducted in order to say what the risk is to the health of the folks detained there and also the future workers that are there.”

Wyden’s June letter similarly cited reports of elevated levels of PFAS, a class of chemicals often referred to as “forever chemicals,” at the site.

Dispute over local authority

According to Kelley and Wolf, the England Airpark board authorized its executive director to negotiate and sign agreements related to the project, rather than voting directly on the final contract. They argued that the board should reconsider its decision because members were presented with a project described as a temporary, non-detention facility.

“It very clearly is detention from the way that we have seen similar facilities operate, the standards that they’re under, the language that they’re using, the fact that families will literally be locked up there and not be allowed to leave,” Kelley said. “What [the board was] told was that they were voting on is something that’s completely different from what is actually happening.”

The advocates also say local residents have limited avenues to stop the project because the appointed airpark board has authority over the property.

The dispute over “voluntary departure”

ICE and airpark officials have characterized the planned population as families and individuals who are voluntarily returning to their countries of origin.

Advocates argued that the term “voluntary” can obscure the circumstances under which people decide to leave.

Wolf said immigrants may agree to departure because of fear or deteriorating conditions while in immigration custody. She argued that placing people in a locked facility before putting them on deportation flights complicates the idea that their departure is entirely voluntary.

“There is no need—if people want to go back to their country, if that’s the decision that they’re making—for detention to ever be involved in that,” Wolf said.

Organizing against the project

Kelley said residents from Alexandria and other parts of Louisiana have attended public meetings, contacted board members, and organized demonstrations. Advocates have also held a vigil at the airport and have sought support from religious organizations and local community groups.

A grassroots organization known as CENLA Activism has emerged as one of the local groups involved in the opposition campaign. The organizers say their goal is to challenge the broader expansion of immigration detention infrastructure in Louisiana.

“We want to see this facility canceled,” Kelley said. “We want to see an end to all detention, but particularly child detention.”

A fight with national implications

For the organizers, the dispute in Alexandria is part of a much larger confrontation over the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

They argued that Louisiana’s network of detention centers and its airport infrastructure has made the state an important part of the administration’s deportation strategy. The proposed family facility, they said, would add children and families to that system.

“It is very important to organize in this state,” Kelly said, describing Louisiana as a difficult but consequential place to fight over immigration and human rights issues, “because we think this is the heart of the fight for human rights, for equality, for dignity, for a true democracy. … It is a difficult fight. But if we can win in Louisiana, if we can stop the expansion of this ICE infrastructure here in Louisiana, then we can win nationally.”

Update, Aug. 27, 2026: This story has been updated to include a statement from England Airpark Executive Director Ralph Hennessy.

Editorial Team:
Sahar Fatima, Lead Editor
Carolyn Copeland, Top Editor
Rashmee Kumar, Copy Editor