The Otay Mesa Detention Center, a 1,400-bed facility in San Diego, has been ordered by a federal judge to permit health inspections by San Diego County officials. This ruling, issued on June 3, 2026, marks a significant victory for local authorities in their ongoing dispute with federal agencies over oversight of private immigration detention centers.
The case, which began in March 2026, centers around a California law passed in 2026 that grants local health officials the authority to inspect these facilities. San Diego County is the first to exercise this authority, setting a precedent that could influence how other counties implement the law.
The Legal Battle and Its Implications
Judge James Simmons Jr. of the Southern District of California ruled that the inspection must be completed by June 17, 2026, and ordered CoreCivic, the facility’s operator, to provide a list of requested policies and procedures. This decision comes after San Diego County sued the Department of Homeland Security in March 2026, following denied access to the facility for two county supervisors and a health inspector.
In his ruling, Judge Simmons emphasized the county’s responsibility for the safety and health of all individuals within its jurisdiction, including those detained in the facility. County Counsel Damon Brown reiterated this point, stating, “The county is responsible for the safety and the health of anyone who is within this jurisdiction, which includes those detained in the facility.”
The Role of Local Oversight
The Otay Mesa Detention Center is one of eight privately run detention centers in California, collectively holding approximately 5,300 people. This number has increased significantly from about 3,100 in April 2026, reflecting a nationwide immigration crackdown. The judge’s order also mandates that county officials negotiate with federal agencies and CoreCivic to determine the scope of the inspection and the process for obtaining detainee consent for interviews and medical record reviews.
Controversy and Counterarguments
CoreCivic’s attorney, Anne Orcutt, argued that the county’s request was unprecedented and discriminatory against the federal government. She noted that CoreCivic had filed a California Public Records Act request to determine if supervisors typically accompany health inspectors. However, San Diego County Supervisor Terra Lawson-Remer dismissed this argument as a red herring, stating that the inspection was denied regardless of the supervisors’ presence.
Motivations Behind the Inspection
County supervisors cited CalMatters reporting as a key motivator for their inspection request. Specifically, they highlighted a case involving a deaf Mongolian man who spent over four months in detention without access to a Mongolian Sign Language interpreter, a situation his attorney compared to solitary confinement. This incident underscores the need for enhanced oversight and accountability in private detention facilities.
CoreCivic spokesman Ryan Gustin emphasized the company’s commitment to the safety, health, and well-being of detainees, stating, “We fully respect the judicial process and remain committed to working with both ICE and San Diego County to find a mutually agreed-upon resolution to this matter.”
The Broader Impact
This ruling could have far-reaching implications for how local officials across California implement the 2026 state law aimed at providing additional oversight for privately-run immigration detention facilities. By setting a precedent for inspections, the decision may encourage other counties to exercise their authority under the law, potentially leading to improved conditions and greater transparency in these facilities.
As the inspection proceeds, all parties involved will be watching closely to see how this legal battle unfolds and what it means for the future of immigration detention oversight in California.
