A reported hunger strike involving roughly 300 detainees at Delaney Hall in Newark has pushed Border Czar Tom Homan to respond sharply, saying hunger strikes rarely change enforcement outcomes and that authorities could seek court orders to force-feed those who endanger their health.

The situation began around Saturday, May 23, when detainees at Delaney Hall, a privately run ICE facility in Newark, protested alleged poor conditions. Complaints reportedly included spoiled or expired food, inadequate medical care, overcrowding, and retaliation against participants. Officials and advocates are trading claims while the strike continues to draw attention to facility conditions and broader detention policies.

Tom Homan addressed the strike directly and without much sympathy for the tactic, framing it as unlikely to achieve detainees’ goals. He emphasized that enforcement and detention operations will continue despite the protest. Homan also warned that medical intervention, including court-authorized force-feeding, is an option if doctors determine detainees face serious danger.

He put the response in blunt terms: “Look, I’ve done this since 1984. Hunger strikes never work,” Homan. “We’re not going to change what we do because someone goes on a hunger strike. As a matter of fact, if it gets bad enough and the physicians feel like they’re putting themselves in extreme danger, medical danger, then we’ll force-feed them. We’ll get a court order and force-feed them.”

Homan made clear he does not see the hunger strike as an effective lever for release or faster hearings, and he signaled continued arrests and detentions. “Hunger strikes do not work. So they can put themselves in a position where they’re not eating, but it’s not going to cause them to be released,” he said. “We are going to continue to arrest people. We’ll continue to detain people.”

Beyond immediate threats of force-feeding, Homan framed the moment as part of a larger policy shift toward more federal control of detention infrastructure. He warned critics of contract facilities that the federal government is moving to build and operate its own detention capacity. That, he said, will reduce reliance on private centers and local political roadblocks.

“As far as complaining about ICE contract facilities, well, guess what? We’re building our own warehouse facilities. We will have the federally-owned detention facilities by the thousands of beds. So look for the future,” Homan said, underscoring a push for federal land and federal control over detention operations.

Homan also argued that owning facilities outright would prevent local officials and state leaders from meddling with operations. “And I’ve said from day one, we need to own more of these facilities when we operate them on federal land,” he added. “And that way, we’re not dealing with all this crap from the local politicians and the state and the governors because this is a federal facility on federal land. That’s the direction we need to go to. And that’s the direction we’re heading in.”

From a law-and-order perspective, Homan is signaling a refusal to be pressured by protest tactics while promising to strengthen federal control over detention. That stance aligns with a straightforward enforcement-first view: secure custody, maintain order, and expand federal capacity. For officials pushing that line, local complaints and strikes cannot be allowed to hinder removal and detention operations.

Advocates for detainees have focused on the specific allegations about food, medical care, and retaliation, arguing those claims merit investigation and immediate fixes. Facility managers and federal officials, however, will point to rule of law and court processes to govern any medical interventions or policy changes. The dispute highlights a deeper fight over how detention should be run and who gets the final say.

The Newark hunger strike and Homan’s comments are likely to sharpen debates about detention standards, enforcement priorities, and federal versus local control. Supporters of stricter border and detention policy will view Homan’s reaction as necessary to maintain order and deter disruptive tactics. Opponents will press for transparency, inspections, and accountability where conditions are in question.

As the story unfolds, key facts to watch are whether physicians deem detainees at medical risk, whether a court order for force-feeding is pursued, and how quickly federal plans for new, federally owned facilities progress. For now, Homan’s message is clear: hunger strikes rarely change enforcement outcomes, and federal action on facilities is coming.