The Boom of Private Detention Under the Trump Administration
In recent months, private prison companies like CoreCivic and GEO Group have seen a surge in growth, driven by the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policies. These companies, which operate a significant portion of the U.S. immigration detention system, are anticipating a period of unprecedented expansion. Executives from these firms, such as CoreCivic’s Damon Hininger, have expressed optimism about the future, with Hininger describing it as one of the most exciting times in his 32-year career. This optimism stems from the administration’s goal of detaining and deporting vast numbers of undocumented immigrants, a strategy that heavily relies on private detention facilities.
The industry’s resurgence comes after a period of significant challenges. Just a few years ago, public sentiment turned against private detention companies due to allegations of poor conditions, safety violations, and ethical concerns over profiting from immigration detention. This backlash led to major banks like Bank of America and Wells Fargo pulling their financial support, and President Joe Biden’s campaign promise to end federal contracts with these companies. However, the industry’s downturn was short-lived. Despite Biden’s rhetoric, many federal contracts remained intact, and some banks have since softened their stance, allowing financing for detention companies under certain conditions.
The turning point came with the return of Donald Trump to the presidency. Trump’s campaign promises to swiftly deport millions of undocumented immigrants have created a surge in demand for detention facilities. The process of detaining immigrants while they await immigration hearings or deportation has become a lucrative business for private companies. CoreCivic, for instance, recently announced the reopening of a family detention center in Dilley, Texas, which can hold up to 2,400 people. This facility, which had been a flashpoint for humanitarian concerns during Trump’s first presidency, is now being brought back online to meet the growing demand for detention space.
A History of Private Detention in the U.S.
The origins of private immigration detention in the U.S. can be traced back to 1983, when the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the precursor to ICE, contracted CoreCivic to operate a facility in Texas. The first private detention center was hastily set up in a motel, with company co-founder T. Don Hutto using his personal credit card to purchase supplies. This marked the beginning of a long-standing partnership between the government and private companies in the business of detaining immigrants.
Over the years, the use of private detention facilities has expanded significantly. A federal law passed in the 1990s codified the practice of favoring private or local government facilities over building new federal detention centers. This shift was driven by the need to quickly accommodate growing numbers of immigrants in custody. By the 2000s, CoreCivic had been joined by its main competitor, GEO Group, which eventually surpassed CoreCivic in securing federal contracts. Today, these two companies dominate the private detention industry, operating facilities that hold tens of thousands of immigrants each day.
The relationship between the government and private detention companies has been shaped by both necessity and controversy. While these companies have proven adept at quickly scaling up detention capacity, critics argue that this has come at the expense of transparency and accountability. The industry’s history is marked by allegations of poor living conditions, inadequate medical care, and questionable labor practices, all of which have raised ethical concerns about profiting from the detention of immigrants.
Cultivating Government Ties: The Revolving Door and Political Influence
Private detention companies have long cultivated close ties with government officials, creating a symbiotic relationship that has helped them secure lucrative contracts. Executives and political action committees associated with CoreCivic and GEO Group have traditionally made campaign donations to both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. However, in recent election cycles, the vast majority of these contributions have gone to Republican candidates and PACs. For example, a GEO Group subsidiary donated over $2 million to Republican PACs in the last election cycle, with much of this funding supporting House Republicans and former President Trump.
The cozy relationship between these companies and the government extends beyond campaign donations. A revolving door of personnel has seen former ICE officials move into high-ranking positions at CoreCivic and GEO Group, and vice versa. This close-knit relationship has raised concerns among advocates, who argue that it discourages rigorous oversight and creates a conflict of interest. For instance, David Venturella, a longtime ICE official, left the agency in 2012 to work at GEO Group, where he eventually became the head of client relations. He has since returned to ICE as a senior adviser, a move that critics say exemplifies the incestuous relationship between the agency and private detention companies.
Other notable examples include Matthew Albence, the former acting director of ICE during Trump’s first administration, who now works at GEO Group. Similarly, Daniel Bible, who previously oversaw ICE detention facilities during the Biden administration, joined GEO Group earlier this year. These personnel moves highlight the deep connections between the government and private detention companies, raising questions about whether these relationships improperly influence contract decisions and oversight.
The Expansion of Detention Beds and Its Implications
To meet the Trump administration’s deportation goals, private detention companies are rapidly expanding their capacity. The administration’s border czar, Tom Homan, has stated that at least 100,000 detention beds will be needed—more than double the current capacity. This ambitious target has set off a scramble among lawmakers to secure funding for new detention facilities. The cost of detaining immigrants is substantial, with each bed costing taxpayers around $165 per day. For companies like CoreCivic and GEO Group, this translates into significant revenue. CoreCivic, for example, has announced plans to nearly triple its detention capacity, which could generate an additional $1.5 billion in revenue—equivalent to 75% of the company’s total revenue for 2024.
However, the rapid expansion of detention facilities has raised alarms among advocates, who warn that the push to add more beds will come at the expense of oversight and transparency. Private detention companies have been criticized for overcrowding facilities and failing to meet basic standards of care. In some cases, facilities have been forced to close or reduce their populations due to unsafe or unsanitary conditions. For example, a federal judge ordered the release of detainees from a GEO Group facility in Adelanto, California, in 2020 after a COVID-19 outbreak swept through the center. Although the facility has since reopened, it continues to be a symbol of the humanitarian concerns surrounding private detention.
The Trump administration’s push to expand detention capacity has also led to calls for reduced oversight of these facilities. Tom Homan has advocated for fewer inspections and less agency involvement in monitoring detention centers. He has argued that the conditions in local prisons and jails for U.S. citizens should be considered acceptable for detained immigrants, despite the fact that these facilities often have lower standards than federal detention centers. Many of the immigrants being detained are not charged with crimes but are instead accused of civil violations related to their entry into the country.
Oversight and Transparency Concerns
The lack of robust oversight and transparency in private detention facilities has long been a source of concern for advocates and watchdog groups. Government inspections have repeatedly uncovered evidence of negligence, including poor access to medical care, unsanitary conditions, and, in some cases, deaths in custody. For instance, a federal audit of the Adelanto facility in 2018 found violations that "pose a significant threat to maintaining detainee rights and ensuring their mental and physical well-being." Despite these findings, the facility has reopened, highlighting the challenges of ensuring accountability in the private detention system.
Critics argue that the push to expand detention capacity will only exacerbate these issues. As more immigrants are detained, the strain on existing facilities will likely lead to overcrowding and a decline in living conditions. Companies like CoreCivic and GEO Group have been accused of prioritizing profits over the well-being of detainees, particularly through practices such as paying immigrants just $1 a day for labor. Lawsuits against these companies allege that this amounts to illegal forced labor, a charge that both companies deny. CoreCivic maintains that its labor program is voluntary and that detainees receive proper access to medical care, while GEO Group claims that its facilities are closely monitored and meet strict government standards.
Despite these assurances, advocates remain skeptical. Heidi Altman, the vice president of policy at the National Immigrant Law Center, warns that the expansion of detention facilities will lead to "even less accountability and many more abuses and almost certainly more deaths." These concerns are compounded by the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce oversight of detention centers. In his recent remarks at a sheriffs’ conference, Tom Homan expressed a desire to reduce the number of inspections and agencies monitoring these facilities. This approach, critics argue, will only embolden companies to cut corners and ignore the rights of detainees.
The Human Cost of Immigration Detention
The debate over private detention centers is not just about numbers and policies—it is fundamentally about the human cost of immigration enforcement. For the thousands of immigrants being detained each day, the conditions in these facilities can have lasting effects on their health, well-being, and chances of successfully navigating the immigration system. Many detainees are held for months or even years as they await a ruling on their case, often without access to legal representation or adequate medical care. The financial burden on taxpayers is also significant, with billions of dollars being spent each year to maintain the detention system.
The recent reopening of the Dilley family detention center in Texas serves as a stark reminder of the humanitarian concerns surrounding immigration detention. This facility, which can hold up to 2,400 people, including children and parents, was a focal point of criticism during Trump’s first administration due to reports of poor conditions and the trauma experienced by families. Although the Biden administration had curtailed the practice of detaining families, the facility is now being brought back online to accommodate the growing number of immigrants in custody. This decision has reignited fears about the impact of detention on vulnerable populations, particularly children.
As the private detention industry continues to grow, so too does the need for greater transparency and accountability. Advocates are calling for independent oversight of detention facilities, as well as stricter enforcement of existing standards for detention conditions. They also argue that the U.S. should explore alternatives to detention, such as community-based programs that allow immigrants to live freely while their cases are processed. These alternatives not only cost less but also align with the country’s values of fairness and compassion.
The Future of Private Detention in America
The future of private detention in the U.S. remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the industry’s growth is inextricably linked to the government’s immigration policies. As long as there is a demand for detaining large numbers of immigrants, companies like CoreCivic and GEO Group will continue to play a major role in the detention system. However, the ethical, financial, and human costs of this system cannot be ignored. The debate over private detention is ultimately a reflection of the broader conversation about how the U.S. treats immigrants and upholds its values of justice and humanity.
For now, the private detention industry is enjoying a period of unprecedented growth, driven by the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement agenda. CoreCivic and GEO Group are expanding their operations, reopening shuttered facilities, and securing lucrative government contracts. Their executives are optimistic about the future, and investors are taking notice, as reflected in the recent rise in CoreCivic’s stock price. However, this optimism is tempered by the ongoing concerns about the treatment of detainees and the lack of accountability within the system.
Looking ahead, the outcome of this debate will depend on a combination of political will, public pressure, and legal challenges. Advocates for immigrants are vowing to continue their fight for greater transparency and accountability, while the private detention industry is likely to push back against efforts to restrict its growth. As the country grapples with the complexities of immigration enforcement, one thing is certain: the issue of private detention will remain a contentious and emotionally charged topic for years to come.