The Trump administration wasted millions of dollars on expanding immigration detention facilities, according to a report released Thursday by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The expansion was part of a broader crackdown on illegal immigration, aiming to increase capacity for detaining individuals encountered at the border. However, the GAO found that the significant expenditure did not translate into efficient use of resources, with many facilities remaining largely empty. During fiscal years 2017 through 2020, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) obligated approximately $288 million to expand detention capacity. The GAO's review revealed that for periods in 2019 and 2020, average daily populations in these expanded facilities were significantly below capacity, leading to substantial underutilization. This underutilization resulted in millions of dollars in costs for unused tent facilities and uneaten food, as well as other resources that were procured but not needed. The report highlights a critical inefficiency in the planning and execution of the detention expansion initiative. The GAO recommended that DHS establish criteria and guidance to ensure that future decisions on detention capacity are based on thorough analysis and projections of need. The agency concurred with this recommendation. Critics have long argued that the focus on detention and expansion was a costly and ineffective approach to immigration management. This report from the GAO provides concrete data to support those concerns, detailing the financial implications of the administration's policies. The report further detailed that DHS did not consistently ensure that its detention capacity planning was based on up-to-date needs assessments. This lack of consistent oversight contributed to the procurement of resources that were subsequently underused. The findings raise questions about the strategic allocation of federal funds for immigration enforcement and detention, particularly in light of the GAO's conclusion that the expansion did not align with actual operational needs during the periods reviewed.