Limit 04 of nine · Private detention
Limit for-profit detention
Detention +71%, facilities +78% — 39 deaths in custody, the most since 2003.
The problem
For-profit detention is the engine of the surge: the bed count is the removal capacity. After the federal detention-oversight office was dissolved in March 2025, the number of people held rose 71% and the number of facilities holding them rose 78% — backing a 100,000-bed target, with $2.1 billion to one contractor and $653 million to another in a single year. The more beds they fill, the more they are paid.
What the law does
Bars private contractors from operating civil detention in the state, and withholds the state permits, funding, and leases that enable it.
Where it stands
- Alaska: None
- Alabama: None
- Arkansas: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Arizona: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- California: None
- Colorado: None
- Connecticut: None
- District of Columbia: None
- Delaware: None
- Florida: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Georgia: None
- Hawaii: None
- Iowa: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Idaho: None
- Illinois: Full
- Indiana: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Kansas: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Kentucky: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Louisiana: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Massachusetts: None
- Maryland: Partial
- Maine: None
- Michigan: None
- Minnesota: None
- Missouri: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Mississippi: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Montana: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- North Carolina: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- North Dakota: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Nebraska: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- New Hampshire: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- New Jersey: None
- New Mexico: Partial
- Nevada: None
- New York: Partial
- Ohio: None
- Oklahoma: None
- Oregon: Full
- Pennsylvania: None
- Rhode Island: None
- South Carolina: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- South Dakota: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Tennessee: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Texas: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Utah: None
- Virginia: None
- Vermont: None
- Washington: Partial
- Wisconsin: None
- West Virginia: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Wyoming: None (state law mandates cooperation)
- Puerto Rico: None
Methodology v3.4 · scored Jun 10 2026
The model language
Read the full model bill →“No private contractor shall own, operate, or maintain a civil immigration detention facility within the State.”
What we propose
Withhold the state’s own permits, funding, leases, and zoning from for-profit civil detention — the lever courts have left standing — and bar private operation where it holds, with a phase-out and a severability clause so the property prongs survive if the operating ban is enjoined. Model: Illinois 730 ILCS 141 (federal challenge dismissed); Maryland HB 1018 (zoning).
Who’s already done it
6 states have acted; only Illinois and Oregon at full strength. Illinois’s 2019 Moratorium Act is the durable model — its federal challenge was dismissed; California’s flat ban was struck, which is exactly why the Illinois design matters.
On the record
- GAO-26-108886 (Jun 9 2026) — detention +71%, facilities +78%
- GAO-25-107580 — detention-oversight office dissolved March 2025
- Illinois 730 ILCS 141 (2019) — federal challenge dismissed Jan 2024
Status: mixed — flat bans have been struck; the durable slice is the state’s own permits, funding, and leases (the Illinois model).
One of nine.
Not the whole fight.
See where your state stands on all nine limits, or read the model bill section that closes this one.
Check your state → ← Back to the Nine