Photo: Aurelia Ventura / Impremedia / Real America News
By: EFE
Sunday, November 17
California can't ban private jails and ICE detention centers
The Office of Immigration and Customs Control (ICE) and the company of private prisons GEO won this Tuesday a legal battle against AB law 32 of California, which prohibits the construction of private prisons and migrant detention centers and requires that Existing facilities are closed for 2028 in the state.
The ruling in favor of ICE was given this Tuesday by a panel of the Ninth Circuit of Appeals, which said that e California must exempt federal immigration detention centers from the prohibitions established by the AB Act 32.
By delete gradu ally the privately run immigrant detention centers , the law “attempts to regulate an area – immigration detention – that belongs exclusively to the purview of the federal government,” wrote the majority of the panel.
Judge Kenneth K. Lee, appointed in the Donald Trump administration, wrote that “California is not simply exercising its traditional policing powers but rather hampering federal policy. of immigration. ”
The AB law 32 prevents the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) from signing or renewing a contract with a private prison company after January 1, 2020 and will prevent the state from holding inmates in for-profit correctional facilities effective 2028 .
The provision also affects immigration detention centers run by private companies .
The two main private security companies in the country, GEO Group and CoreCivic, were the most affected firms with the measure.
In December 2019, before the AB came into force 32, GEO sued the measure alleging that the purpose of the state law was “to undermine and eliminate the congressionally approved and funded application of federal immigration and criminal laws,” and asked the court to prohibit the state from enforcing the statute.
According to the lawsuit, AB 54 affects 11 prisons and immigrant detention centers administered in a manner a private in California , with almost 11, 000 beds in total, the vast majority of federal detention capacity in the state. GEO manages seven of those facilities.
In September of last year the federal judge for the Southern District in San Diego, Janis Sammartino, had confirmed in largely the legality of the AB 32, for which ICE and GEO went to the Court of Appeals.
California has argued that it has a legal right to safeguard the health and safety of detainees in the state, but The Ninth Circuit said the law discriminates against the federal government, as ICE only has privately run detention facilities in California.
The law granted various exemptions for migrant detention centers who have contracts with the state, but did not grant any exceptions to those who have contracts with ICE, highlighted the Ninth Circuit.
In this sense, Judge Bridget S. Bade, also appointed by Trump, said that the AB 32, “devastates the ability” of the federal government to detain immigrants by “trying to ban all current immigration detention facilities in California,” as quoted by the Los Angeles Times.
For her part, Magistrate Mary H. Murguia, appointed by former President Barack Obama, was in favor of the theses of the state of California and warned that the historical police powers of states included regulations affecting health and safety.