States Blocking Trump's Plan to Build Massive New Detention Centers.

Several states are pushing back against plans to build new detention centers as rising detainee numbers and reports of unsafe conditions spark renewed debate over federal immigration enforcement and facility oversight.

The federal government under former President Trump is pursuing plans to construct large-scale immigrant detention centers, prompting increasing opposition from several states. This initiative comes amid a shift from the Biden administration’s approach to immigration enforcement, which has intensified debates surrounding the management and expansion of detention facilities. A recent internal audit of Camp East Montana revealed serious deficiencies, including substandard medical treatment, insufficient oversight, and unsafe conditions for detainees.

Findings from the ICE Audit

• 49 documented failures in medical care, disease prevention, and overall facility management.
• Incidents of violence inside detention facilities have often remained unreported.
• Sexual assault and abuse allegations were frequently ignored or inadequately addressed.
• Overcrowding, poor hygiene conditions, and denial of necessary medical attention, especially for children, were observed.

The audit, conducted independently by government inspectors, exposed systemic neglect. Despite the severity of the findings, the federal administration has not initiated comprehensive corrective measures.

Detention Trends and Conditions

The population in immigration detention has grown substantially, with nearly 70,000 individuals currently held—a rise of over 70% since the end of the Biden administration. The year 2025 saw a marked increase in detainee mortality, reaching levels not seen since the early 2000s. Simultaneously, ICE facility inspections declined by more than 36%, reducing oversight of detention operations. The combination of rising detainee numbers, decreased inspections, and profit-driven private detention operators has created an environment with limited accountability.

State-Level Resistance

States are increasingly asserting authority over immigration detention practices, challenging federal expansion efforts. Measures include legislation, zoning restrictions, and oversight mechanisms to regulate detention conditions.

• New Mexico: Passed HB9, banning public entities from contracting with ICE for civil immigration detention, leading to the planned closure of its largest detention center.
• California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Oregon, Washington: Limited or prohibited local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, including 287(g) agreements.
• New Jersey: Proposed a 50% tax on private immigrant detention facility revenue to fund an immigrant protection program.
• Maryland, Illinois, Colorado: Implemented zoning restrictions, health and safety requirements, and bans on locating detention facilities near schools, parks, and places of worship.

Washington and other states have created registries and reporting requirements to ensure transparency regarding detention operations and incidents. Illinois requires annual reporting of all federal law enforcement inquiries to the State Attorney General. Minnesota proposes marking vehicles used for detaining immigrants. Colorado and Washington have introduced regular inspections and health compliance checks, while New York is considering forming a legislative oversight committee.

Legal and Organizational Developments

States are using legal challenges, public scrutiny, and courtroom actions to monitor federal detention practices. Efforts are coordinated through networks such as the State Futures Federation, which unites elected officials in sharing best practices, drafting legislation, and promoting oversight frameworks. While not all legislative measures have succeeded, proposed bills signal growing commitment by lawmakers to enforce accountability and safeguard detainee rights.

Conclusion

The struggle over federal immigration detention centers reflects a broader conflict between national policy and state-level governance. As federal plans to expand detention facilities proceed, states are increasingly taking proactive steps to regulate, oversee, and limit the scope of detention, demonstrating a shift toward localized control and oversight. The ongoing scrutiny and legal interventions highlight a growing effort to ensure the safety, health, and rights of individuals held in immigration detention facilities across the country.

Sources:

• Local and state authorities block ICE plans to turn warehouses into detention centers
• ICE Is Seeking to Build New Detention Centers Around the U.S. Here’s How Communities Are Battling to Stop It
• Trump’s $45 billion expansion of immigrant detention sites faces pushback from communities
• Trump Wants to Build Massive New Detention Centers. States Are Blocking Their Construction.