California, Santa Clara County file lawsuit over planned ICE facility near Gilroy

SANTA CLARA COUNTY, Calif. - Santa Clara County could become the home of a federal immigration detainment facility, but not if state and local authorities have a say in the matter.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County Council Tony LoPresti on Wednesday filed a lawsuit to block the development of an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Facility in unincorporated Santa Clara County. The land was leased in 2025 by a private developer to the federal government, to be used by ICE.

The complaint asks the court to permanently enjoin the construction of the facility on the grounds that it violates the National Environmental Policy Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and California’s Williamson Act.

"President Trump’s mass detention and deportation campaign has led to cruel, inhumane, and unacceptable conditions at immigration holding and detention facilities across California," Bonta said in a press release. "But instead of working to improve conditions at these facilities — instead of enforcing ICE’s own detention standards — the Trump Administration is trying to jam through a new facility on a community that doesn’t want it."

The facility

What we know:

The proposed facility is likely to be developed into an Enforcement and Removal Operations office, a release from Bonta’s office states. ERO offices are designed for administrative use and short-term detainment, but have been the subject of numerous lawsuits, and investigative reports have revealed overcrowding, long-term confinement, and inhumane conditions.

"Under this administration, we’ve seen ICE offices have become mini-detention centers, despite being unequipped for long-term holding.That’s unacceptable. So is the secrecy surrounding the details of this project. But one thing is clear: ICE’s plans to construct a facility near Gilroy violates multiple federal laws," Bonta said in a release.

Immigration approach

Why you should care:

Trump has made immigration a cornerstone of his second term in office. The Department of Homeland Security and its subordinate office, ICE, have been directed to reshape immigration enforcement to resemble "(Amazon) Prime, but with human beings."

As part of that process, DHS has purchased or leased numerous facilities across the country — buildings not designed for human habitation — and converted them into immigration detention and processing centers, the conditions of which have been heavily criticized.

"Since President Trump took office, the County of Santa Clara has made clear that we won’t tolerate a federal government that abuses the law and jeopardizes the rights and well-being of our immigrant community," LoPresti said in a press release. "We’re proud to stand alongside Attorney General Bonta in opposing this reckless attempt to build an ICE facility on sensitive and protected land without regards to its impact on the environment, the community, and, most critically, the humans who would be detained there."

What's at issue

What they're saying:

The lawsuit alleges that since leasing the property, the federal government has moved to quickly develop a facility, and in doing so has ignored important environmental concerns and federal laws.

The complaint alleges that constructing the facility could permanently destroy the ecosystem, habitat and agricultural value of land that Santa Clara and California have protected for exclusive agricultural use since the 1960s. The project would also reportedly place severe strain on waste and drinking water infrastructure, and would cause heavy deterioration to critical roadways.

Bonta and LoPresti allege the development of an ICE facility violates:

• National Environmental Policy Act: The federal government failed to produce either an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement before entering the lease and beginning construction, as required by law.
• Immigration and Nationality Act: The property is located in an area known to support several endangered and threatened species, is zoned exclusively for agricultural use, and is subject to the Williamson Act contract with the county, which allows only agricultural use in exchange for tax benefits.
• Intergovernmental Cooperation Act: The federal government did not sufficiently attempt to consult with the County or State regarding the project, and obscured plans to develop and operate an ICE facility, which prevented the local and state governments from providing input, which is a violation of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act’s consultation mandate.
• Administrative Procedure Act: Constructing the facility violates multiple laws and should therefore be set aside under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Williamson Act: The property owner and the federal government must comply with a Williamson Act contract that applies to the land and which restricts it to exclusively agricultural and agriculture-compatible uses, in exchange for significant property tax benefits. The property owner completed none of the procedural steps to relieve itself of its Williamson Act contract obligations prior to leasing the land to the government.

Bonta has filed multiple lawsuits against the Trump Administration, often as part of a larger coalition of states.

NewsImmigration