The Geo Group, Inc. v. Inslee

151 F.4th 1107 (9th Cir. 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · February 11, 2026 · No. 24-2815

Summary

The Ninth Circuit denied The GEO Group, Inc.’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc concerning Washington regulations governing conditions at a federal immigration detention facility. Judges Fletcher, Gould, and Nguyen explained that the appropriate comparators were Washington’s civil detention and treatment facilities rather than its prisons and jails. Judge Bumatay, joined by eight judges, dissented, arguing that the regulations discriminated against federal operations in violation of the Supremacy Clause.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Writing for the Court
William A. Fletcher; Ronald M. Gould; Jacqueline H. Nguyen
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decision date
February 11, 2026
Docket number
24-2815
Procedural posture
The defendants petitioned for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc after a Ninth Circuit panel vacated the district court's preliminary injunction against enforcement of portions of Washington House Bill 1470 and remanded for further proceedings.
Standard of review
The court considered whether rehearing and rehearing en banc were warranted under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 40; the opinion does not state a separate merits standard of review for the underlying preliminary injunction.
Precedential value
Published order; the statement respecting denial and dissent address the underlying published panel decision, while the rehearing disposition itself is procedural.
Parties
Jay Inslee, Governor, Robert Ferguson v. The GEO Group, Inc.
Disposition
other

Topics

supremacy clausefederalismpreemptionappellate procedureimmigration

Practice areas

constitutional lawfederal courtsimmigration lawadministrative law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the petition for panel rehearing should be granted.
  2. Whether the case warranted rehearing en banc.
  3. Whether the appropriate comparators for Washington's regulation of the federal contractor-operated immigration detention facility are Washington's prisons and jails or other involuntary civil-detention facilities.

Holdings

  1. The petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc was denied because the petition did not receive a majority of votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration.
  2. The panel stated that the appropriate comparators are Washington's residential treatment facilities for people with mental or substance-abuse disorders and involuntary civil-commitment facilities, rather than Washington's prisons and jails.

Key quotations

The petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc (Dkt. No. 75) is DENIED. (at 3)
After concluding that the appropriate comparators are not Washington’s jails and prisons, but rather the two types of involuntary civil detainment facilities, we remanded to the district court to make that comparison in the first instance. (at 6)
Whatever else the Supremacy Clause requires, it prohibits States from targeting the federal government and its contractors with burdensome regulation while exempting themselves from its costs. (at 9)

Factual background

GEO Group privately owns and operates the Northwest Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center in Tacoma, Washington, where individuals are held civilly while their immigration status is determined. Washington enacted regulations governing conditions at the facility, including rules concerning personal belongings, diets, telephone calls, privacy during visits, housekeeping, inspections, and penalties. The regulations exempt Washington's own state and local detention facilities, jails, and prisons from the same requirements and enforcement mechanisms.

Procedural history

The Western District of Washington granted GEO Group's preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of Sections 2, 3, 5, and 6 of House Bill 1470 against the Northwest Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center. The Ninth Circuit panel vacated that injunction and remanded in part for the district court to compare the facility with other involuntary civil-detention facilities. The panel denied rehearing, and the full court declined en banc review because the petition failed to receive a majority of votes of the nonrecused active judges.

Remand instructions

The underlying panel decision remanded to the district court to compare the Northwest Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center with the identified involuntary civil-detention facilities in the first instance.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…