California to End Private Prisons and Detention Centers

California City Correctional Center, a privately owned prison for men, in California City, California (Wikimedia Commons).

Governor Gavin Newsom of California signed a bill on October 11 ending contracts with private prisons and detention centers in the state. The bill prohibits the government of California from renewing or entering into new contracts with private prison providers starting January 1, 2020, and it will phase out private immigration detention centers by 2028. 

“These for-profit prisons do not reflect our values,” said Newsom. The move is a follow-through on one of his campaign promises, something that Newsom emphasized in his inauguration address.

Currently, California has four operational private prisons, housing less than 1 percent of its total imprisoned population. The bill is California’s latest step in a series of reforms aimed at removing privately owned incarceration facilities in recent years. 

Private prisons have faced public pressure, especially in California. Protestors question the motivation of prison companies, arguing that they lack sufficient oversight, contribute to a “culture of mass incarceration” in America, and increase the prison population in order to maximize profits.

The state began using private prisons in the early 2000s, when former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger began sending inmates to out of state private prisons in order to decrease overcrowding in state facilities. Since then, the state has used private prisons to offset a population cap law on state prisons. 

The bill will also phase out private immigrant detention centers, which have been under scrutiny for inhumane conditions. A DHS watchdog investigation performed a series of surprise inspections and found several glaring issues: delayed access to medical care, expired food, and dilapidated and unsanitary facilities. The report cited that, while the conditions were not universal, “observations, interviews with detainees and staff, and reviews of documents revealed several persistent issues” in the facilities. 

The move is unsurprising in a state that has a reputation to be immigrant-friendly. A law earlier this year restricted the ability of law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, effectively designating itself as a “sanctuary state.” However, 14 cities are refusing to comply.

California should expect similar backlash with this new law prohibiting private immigration detention centers. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement condemned the bill in a statement and has a team reviewing its legality. The statement questioned the state’s ability to create this law, saying, “the idea that a state law can bind the hands of a federal law enforcement agency managing a national network of detention facilities is simply false.” ICE also raised concerns about the implications of the bill, saying that the agency will have to transfer immigrants farther distances for detention, which will make it more difficult for families to visit.

Immigrant rights groups and criminal justice reformers see the bill as a victory. State Assemblyman Rob Bonta, who sponsored the bill, said, “By ending the use of for-profit, private prisons and detention facilities, we are sending a powerful message that we vehemently oppose the practice of profiteering off the backs of Californians in custody, that we will stand up for the health, safety and welfare of our people, and that we are committed to humane treatment for all.”