ICE plans to open as many as three new detention centers in rural Colorado, report says
arcamax.com -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 5:27:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Immigration Policy & Border Issues, Political Protests & Rallies
DENVER -- Federal immigration officials intend to triple Colorado's immigrant detention capacity by opening as many as three new facilities in the state in the coming months, according to recent planning documents obtained by the Washington Post.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was already moving to reopen a closed correctional facility in Hudson, northeast of metro Denver. The Denver Post reported on the Hudson plan earlier this week based on what members of the state's congressional delegation were told.
But the new documents indicate the agency is also targeting the reopening of another private prison in Walsenburg, in southern Colorado, and the addition of another 28 beds at the Southern Ute Detention Center in Ignacio, which is on the Southern Ute Indian Reservation, southeast of Durango.
The documents also say ICE plans to expand its capacity at its sole operating facility in the state, in Aurora, from a contracted cap of 1,360 beds to its maximum capacity of 1,530. That expansion, along with the opening of the Hudson and Walsenburg facilities, are both expected before the end of the year, according to the documents.
ICE is rapidly seeking to expand its detention capacity amid President Donald Trump's mass-deportation push. By January, the Washington Post reported, its plans call for detention beds to reach 107,000 nationwide, which would be more than double the nearly 50,000 capacity of the immigration detention system when Trump began his second term.
The expansion and openings would mean Colorado would have the sixth-most ICE detention beds in the country, according to the Washington Post's analysis.
A U.S. Department of Homeland Security spokesman confirmed to the Washington Post that the planning documents were legitimate but said the list was outdated and that its contracts were "not accurate." The list was last updated July 30, the Washington Post reported.
Spokespeople for ICE did not immediately return messages from The Denver Post on Friday.
If all three facilities -- in Hudson, Ignacio and Walsenburg -- were to open, it would represent a significant expansion not only of ICE's current footprint but of its own previous plans. When it put out a request for potential detention sites earlier this year, the agency said it was looking to add up to 850 to 950 new beds in the state.
But now, the three possible new detention centers, coupled with more beds in the Aurora facility, would more than triple capacity from the current limit of 1,360 beds to just over 4,000. Both the Walsenburg and Hudson facilities were among several pitched to ICE in response to its request earlier this year.
The agency's expansion was triggered by Congress, which last month passed a sweeping tax-and-spend bill that included $45 billion for ICE detention facilities.
A spokeswoman for the Southern Ute Tribe also could not immediately provide comment Friday morning.
The Walsenburg facility, formally the Huerfano County Correctional Facility, is owned by CoreCivic, a private prison company. Spokesman Ryan Gustin did not directly respond to questions about the Washington Post's report, deferring questions to ICE.
"We stay in regular contact with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and all our government partners to understand their changing needs," he wrote in an email, "and we work within their established procurement processes. It is our policy to respect these processes."
Protesters planned to hold a protest outside of the Walsenburg prison Friday, opposing its rumored turn to an ICE facility.
In a May earnings call, Damon Hininger, CoreCivic's CEO, said that ICE had toured its facilities in Colorado and indicated it was interested in both the company's Walsenburg prison and its closed prison in Burlington. The company had advertised detention officer jobs on LinkedIn for its Walsenburg prison, contingent on the company winning a contract there. That job posting is no longer available, though maintenance positions have been posted for both prisons.
"I think having beds out West -- that are not all the way over to the coast in California -- where they could service the needs of Salt Lake and Denver and even some of the needs out of Wyoming, Montana, makes our Kit Carson and our Huerfano facilities very attractive to ICE," Hininger said.
The call was previously reported by Colorado Public Radio.
The Hudson facility is owned by the GEO Group, which runs the Aurora detention center. The company did not return messages seeking comment earlier this week.
It's unclear if the list of planned new facilities will grow. On an earnings call last week, Pablo Paez, the GEO Group's executive vice president for corporate relations, said the company was in talks with ICE and the U.S. Marshals Service to activate several other sites nationally, including the Cheyenne Mountain Reentry Center in Colorado Springs.
That facility was also on the list of potential sites submitted to ICE for consideration earlier this year.
_____
Sign Our PetitionThe recent announcement regarding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plans to significantly expand immigrant detention capacity in Colorado serves as a glaring illustration of the ongoing tensions surrounding immigration policy and enforcement in the United States. This development, which seeks to triple the state’s detention capacity, raises critical questions about the ethics of detaining immigrants, the implications for vulnerable populations, and the broader historical context of immigration enforcement in the U.S. Through the lens of social justice, it becomes imperative to scrutinize not only the motivations behind such expansions but also the ramifications for communities, especially those historically marginalized.
Historically, the expansion of ICE detention facilities is not an isolated occurrence but rather a continuation of a long-standing trend that has intensified over the decades. The immigration enforcement landscape has been shaped by a series of policies that prioritize punitive measures over humanitarian considerations. Under the Trump administration, the rhetoric of mass deportation and strict immigration enforcement was not only a political strategy but also a reflection of a broader ideology that views immigrants as threats rather than contributors to society. This current expansion effort in Colorado echoes these sentiments, suggesting a government more interested in incarceration than in addressing the root causes of migration, which often stem from economic hardship, violence, and political instability in immigrants' home countries.
The planned expansions in Colorado—such as the reopening of facilities in Hudson and Walsenburg and the increase of beds in the existing Aurora facility— also bring to light the intersectionality of race, class, and immigration status. Many of the individuals targeted for detention are people of color, often from low-income backgrounds, who may already be vulnerable due to systemic inequities. The decision to establish new facilities, particularly in rural areas, may disproportionately impact these communities, further entrenching social disparities. It is crucial to recognize that the proliferation of detention centers is not merely a logistical decision but one that has profound social implications, reinforcing a narrative of exclusion and punishment for marginalized groups.
Moreover, the expansion is occurring against a backdrop of federal funding bolstered by recent bipartisan congressional actions. The inclusion of $45 billion for ICE detention facilities in a tax-and-spend bill exemplifies the troubling willingness of lawmakers to allocate resources toward punitive enforcement rather than toward programs that promote integration, public health, or economic development. This funding reflects a political calculus that prioritizes the incarceration of immigrants over addressing the social factors that contribute to migration, including climate change, economic inequality, and violence. In this context, it is essential for advocates and constituents alike to challenge the framing of immigration as a security issue, emphasizing instead the need for a compassionate response rooted in human rights.
In addition to the immediate implications for immigrant communities, the expansion of ICE detention facilities raises broader questions about the role of private prisons and their influence on immigration policy. The involvement of private companies in the management of detention centers often leads to a profit-driven approach that prioritizes revenue generation over the well-being of detainees. This commodification of human lives is a stark reminder of the moral implications of allowing profit motives to guide public policy. It is vital for individuals to engage in conversations about the privatization of immigration enforcement and to advocate for alternatives that prioritize human dignity and community support over incarceration.
In conclusion, the planned expansion of ICE detention facilities in Colorado is a multifaceted issue that warrants critical examination. By understanding the historical and social contexts that inform this development, advocates can better articulate the need for a humane and just immigration policy. This is not simply a matter of immigration enforcement; it is about addressing systemic injustices and advocating for a society that recognizes the inherent dignity of all individuals, regardless of their immigration status. As citizens, we must confront these policies and hold our leaders accountable, demanding a shift toward a more equitable and compassionate approach to immigration that reflects our shared values of justice and humanity.
The recent announcement regarding the expansion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities in Colorado marks a significant shift in the state's immigration enforcement landscape. The plan to open three new centers and expand existing capacities reflects a broader national trend driven by punitive immigration policies that prioritize detention over humane treatment and community support. The implications of this expansion extend beyond mere numbers; they signal a commitment to a system that criminalizes immigrants, reinforcing a longstanding narrative that has historically vilified marginalized communities.
To fully understand the ramifications of this development, we must delve into the historical context of immigration enforcement in the United States. The late 20th century saw a dramatic increase in the criminalization of immigration, culminating in policies that have institutionalized the separation of families and the indefinite detention of individuals without due process. The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, for instance, paved the way for the rapid expansion of detention facilities. Today, the U.S. immigration detention system operates as a vast network of private prisons, often with little transparency or accountability, financially incentivized to detain rather than to facilitate pathways to citizenship or legal status. This present expansion, ostensibly fueled by the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda, reflects a continuation of these troubling trends.
Furthermore, the expansion of ICE's capacity in Colorado raises critical questions about the societal costs associated with such policies. Beyond the immediate human toll on individuals and families affected by detention, there are broader economic impacts. Research indicates that the costs of detention exceed investments in community support services, such as legal aid and integration programs. By choosing to allocate $45 billion towards further entrenching a system that dehumanizes immigrants, Congress is not only failing to address the root causes of migration but is also diverting resources away from initiatives that could foster healthier, more inclusive communities. This decision reflects a deeper ideological commitment to punitive measures over compassionate solutions.
As concerned citizens, there are several actions we can take to challenge this expansion and advocate for more humane immigration policies. First, we can engage in grassroots organizing to raise awareness of the issue. Mobilizing our communities to speak out against the expansion of detention facilities can create pressure on local and federal representatives to reconsider their stance on immigration. Supporting local immigrant rights organizations that provide legal aid and support to those affected by detention can also make a significant difference. Additionally, participating in rallies, town halls, and public forums provides a platform for marginalized voices to be heard and can catalyze change at the policy level.
Moreover, we must hold our elected officials accountable for their decisions regarding immigration policy. The inclusion of funding for ICE in recent congressional spending bills demonstrates a lack of commitment to humane treatment. Engaging in direct communication with our representatives—whether through letters, emails, or phone calls—can convey our opposition to further expansion of detention facilities and demand a reevaluation of national immigration strategy. Ultimately, educating ourselves and others about the ramifications of these policies can empower us to engage in informed discussions, dismantling the misconceptions that often underpin right-wing rhetoric surrounding immigration.
In conclusion, the proposed expansion of ICE detention facilities in Colorado is emblematic of a broader national crisis in immigration policy—a crisis rooted in a historical legacy of exclusion, criminalization, and dehumanization. It is imperative that we, as a society, recognize the significance of this moment and take decisive action. By advocating for compassionate and just immigration reforms, we can challenge the existing paradigm and work towards a future that honors the dignity and humanity of all individuals, regardless of their immigration status. This is not merely a political issue; it is a moral imperative that speaks to our values as a nation built on the ideals of freedom and opportunity for all.
The proposed expansion of immigrant detention facilities in Colorado raises significant concerns regarding the treatment of immigrants and the implications of increased detention capacity. Here’s a detailed list of actions we can take as individuals to address this issue:
### 1. **Educate Yourself and Others** - **Action**: Stay informed about immigration policies and the implications of detention facilities. Share this knowledge with friends and family. - **Example**: Organize a community discussion or a book club focused on immigration issues. Suggested readings include "Detained and Dehumanized: The Impact of Immigration Detention on the Health of Women" by the Women's Refugee Commission.
### 2. **Sign and Share Petitions** - **Action**: Sign and share petitions aimed at halting the expansion of ICE detention centers. - **Example Petitions**: - **"Stop New ICE Detention Centers" petition on Change.org**: https://www.change.org/p/stop-new-ice-detention-centers - **"End the Detention of Immigrants" on MoveOn**: https://act.moveon.org/sign/end-immigrant-detention - **Sharing**: Use social media platforms to share these petitions widely, urging others to sign.
### 3. **Contact Your Representatives** - **Action**: Write to your local and state representatives to express opposition to the expansion of ICE detention facilities. - **Who to Write To**: - **U.S. Senators**: - Michael Bennet - Email: senator_bennet@bennet.senate.gov - Address: 261 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 - John Hickenlooper - Email: hickenlooper.senate.gov/contact - Address: 730 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 - **U.S. House Representatives** (depending on your district): - Check the directory at https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative to find your local representative and their contact information.
### 4. **Participate in Local Protests or Rallies** - **Action**: Join or organize local protests against the expansion of ICE facilities. - **Example**: Look for upcoming events on platforms like Facebook Events or local community boards. Organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) often have information on rallies and protests.
### 5. **Engage with Local Organizations** - **Action**: Volunteer or donate to organizations that support immigrant rights. - **Examples**: - **American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)**: https://www.aclu.org - **United We Dream**: https://unitedwedream.org - **Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition (CIRC)**: https://www.circcolorado.org
### 6. **Utilize Social Media for Advocacy** - **Action**: Use your social media platforms to raise awareness about the issue. - **What to Post**: Share articles, petitions, and personal stories related to the impacts of detention centers. Use hashtags like #AbolishICE and #ImmigrantRights.
### 7. **Write Opinion Pieces** - **Action**: Write letters to the editor or opinion pieces for local newspapers to voice your concerns about the expansion. - **What to Include**: Discuss the human rights implications and the effect on families and communities. Offer personal anecdotes or stories of those affected by detention.
### 8. **Support Legislative Measures** - **Action**: Advocate for legislation that aims to limit or eliminate the use of detention for immigrants. - **Example**: Research bills sponsored by your representatives that address detention and reach out to encourage support.
### 9. **Foster Community Support** - **Action**: Create or join local support networks for immigrants and their families. - **Example**: Start a fundraiser for local immigrant support groups or provide resources for legal assistance.
### Conclusion The expansion of ICE detention facilities presents a critical moment for community action. By engaging in these various efforts, we can collectively push back against these developments and advocate for more humane immigration policies. Activism at the local level can contribute to broader change, ensuring that the voices of those affected are heard and that their rights are protected.