Kotek Seeks Statewide Ban on New Immigration Detention Sites
The governor wants lawmakers to pass a new law, but legal experts cite federal rulings in California and New Jersey that have already invalidated similar bans.
By Bianca Shevchenko ·
Federal agents will have at least 30 days to notify the state before beginning environmental permitting for a temporary immigration detention facility in Newport, according to a settlement reached last October. This agreement is the current legal shield against new construction in that specific city, but it expires in August of next year.
Governor Tina Kotek asked state legislators to close that gap during a press conference on Friday. She proposed a new law for the upcoming session that would prohibit the construction of any new immigration detention centers in Oregon. Kotek stated that the state should not have these facilities, noting that Oregon currently has no large-scale overnight detention site.
The push for new legislation comes as federal agents continue operations in the state. Kotek cited research from immigrant rights advocates suggesting that counties with detention centers experience higher rates of immigration-related arrests. She referenced recent federal actions, including warrantless arrests and damaged vehicles, as reasons for the state to act.
Oregon already passed a law in 2021 that bans the creation of private immigration detention centers. However, legal challenges in other states have weakened the enforcement of such measures. In 2022, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a California ban unconstitutional because it violated the supremacy clause. In 2025, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a New Jersey law that stopped private prison companies from signing contracts with federal immigration authorities.
Tung Yin, a law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School, expressed doubt about the viability of Kotek’s proposal. He wrote in an email that federal courts have recently blocked state laws restricting federal agents from wearing masks. Yin argued that if a mask ban fails in court, a ban on detention centers is even less likely to survive a federal challenge.
Representative David Gomberg of Otis said the Newport settlement leaves the door open for future facilities once the agreement expires. He is in early discussions with colleagues about creating a legislative tool to prevent this. A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said the agency has no new facilities to announce at this time and noted that the supremacy clause means sanctuary politicians do not control federal law enforcement.
The state currently uses processing facilities in cities like Portland, where detainees are held temporarily before being transported to Tacoma, Washington. State law has long prevented local governments from participating in immigration enforcement without a court order.
