ICE’s New Detention Center Contracts Declare State Laws ‘Shall Not Apply’
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement has published draft contract terms for private detention facilities that explicitly state state and local laws "shall not apply" to their operations, according to federal documents seen by WIRED. The move came just a day after a federal judge ruled that contracts cannot override state law and ordered ICE's largest Pacific Northwest detention centre, in Tacoma, opened to Washington state health inspectors, suggesting ICE is seeking to entrench the disputed legal position across multiple states before it can be fully tested in court.
The draft terms, posted on 10 July, cover 5,500 detention beds across four regions, with bed counts and locations matching facilities already run by the GEO Group in Tacoma, Aurora (Colorado), Pompano Beach (Florida) and Philipsburg (Pennsylvania) — all of whose contracts expire in the coming months. US District Judge Benjamin Settle's ruling followed three years of litigation, ten refused inspections and 3,500 detainee complaints, and rejected near-identical "state law shall not apply" language in GEO's March contract for the Tacoma site; a Ninth Circuit judge has since paused his order pending an appeal decision expected in early August. Companies had under a week to respond to the new terms before the 17 July deadline, and neither the Department of Homeland Security nor GEO Group responded to requests for comment.
In short
- ICE draft contracts assert state and local laws don't apply to detention facilities
- Follows a judge's ruling ordering Washington inspectors into a Tacoma centre
- Same disputed legal language would now extend to three more states
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Immigration enforcement is exclusively a federal responsibility, and subjecting private contractors to conflicting state and local regulations undermines operational consistency and efficiency. Federal law already preempts state immigration matters; allowing states to impose their own detention standards, inspection requirements, and regulatory schemes effectively gives them control over federal enforcement operations and creates the litigation and compliance chaos that has already plagued these contracts.
The case against
Basic health, safety, and labour standards apply throughout the United States regardless of the federal purpose of a facility, and no contract clause can exempt operators from state protections afforded to all persons. Federal immigration authority does not extend to operating detention centres as zones insulated from ordinary state regulation; state inspection and oversight of detention conditions is a constitutionally appropriate check on federal power and protects vulnerable detainees who have no political representation.
Explained simply
ICE operates immigration detention centres across the United States where people are held whilst immigration cases are processed. Many are run by private companies, notably the GEO Group, which contract with the government to manage them.
A legal dispute exists over whether these private detention centres must comply with state and local laws, including health and safety standards and inspection requirements. A federal court ruled recently that state laws must apply, but this decision has been challenged and remains contested.
The issue matters because state law establishes health and safety standards and gives state authorities the power to inspect and regulate facilities. If detention centres are exempt from state law, only federal authorities would oversee them, rather than both federal and state authorities.