ICE Hunger Strikes: At Least 18 Immigrants Faced Forced-Feeding Orders

An investigation documented the use of court orders to authorize involuntary medical treatment for detainees who stopped eating as a form of protest.

At least 18 immigrants on hunger strikes faced court orders for involuntary medical treatment while in ICE custody between January 2025 and August 2026, according to DHS information obtained by The Guardian.

• Why it matters: The cases show that forced feeding was not limited to an isolated allegation and raise questions about the judicial process and legal representation available to detainees.

Gabar Choli reported months of forced feeding

Gabar Choli, a Kurdish filmmaker and asylum seeker, began a hunger strike in March 2025 to protest his detention and demand better conditions.

According to The Guardian, he was intermittently subjected to forced feeding for nearly eight months, until he was released from ICE custody in January.

YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN: Jorge Ramos Exposes Alleged Cruelty Inside ICE Detention Centers for Children in Texas

Choli said guards restrained him while medical personnel inserted a tube through his nose and throat to administer nutrients.

«They pushed the tube in so forcefully that it tore my nose,» he alleged.

He also said he suffered inflammation, esophageal damage, stomach problems and psychological effects. The Guardian noted that some details of his account could not be independently verified.

• The detail: Choli said he began the protest as «the only option available» in response to what he considered abuse and mistreatment.

ICE needs court authorization to intervene

When ICE considers a hunger strike to pose a serious threat to a detainee’s health, the agency can ask a federal court for an order allowing it to intervene without the person’s consent.

DHS told The Guardian that ICE respects the right to refuse treatment when applicable, but may seek court authorization when there is a serious risk of death or permanent harm.

• The process: Once authorized, the intervention can include a nasogastric tube inserted through the nose and into the stomach while the person is restrained.

The investigation also found that six of the cases initially reviewed by The Guardian proceeded without legal representation for the immigrants.

Other detainees came close to undergoing the same procedure

Documents reviewed by The Guardian show similar situations in Texas, Florida and Louisiana.

An Afghan detainee in Texas was force-fed daily for nearly six months. A judge initially authorized the procedure eight days after he began his hunger strike.

In Florida, ICE sought authorization to force-feed Ukrainian detainee Andriy Shepitsen after 44 days without eating. His attorney intervened, and the procedure ultimately did not take place.

A Saudi woman in detention also faced a court request after suffering malnutrition and dehydration. She ended her protest before a hearing.

• The difference: Some detainees were force-fed, while others ended their protests before the procedure began.

Legal representation can be decisive

Doctors and human rights organizations cited by The Guardian have condemned forced feeding, with some characterizing it as torture. That description reflects their assessments and should not be presented as a judicial determination.

For detainees, having an attorney can make it possible to challenge a request, seek an independent medical evaluation or present information about their health.

• What they can do: Seek legal representation and challenge the intervention before the court reviewing ICE’s request.
• The limitation: If a judge authorizes involuntary treatment, ICE maintains that it can carry it out under medical supervision and in accordance with the law.

The cases revealed show how an ICE hunger strike can quickly become a medical and legal dispute while the detainee remains in immigration custody, according to Univisión.