County Fight Active-Litigation

San Diego County CA — County Sues ICE Over Blocked Otay Mesa Health Inspection (and Multi-Front Sanctuary-vs-Federal Conflict)

San Diego, CA FIPS 06073

Current status: San Diego County sued ICE on March 10, 2026 after federal agents blocked a county public health inspection on February 20, 2026 — the same day Senator Alex Padilla and California state lawmakers were also denied entry despite prior clearance. ICE initially cleared inspectors then reversed upon arrival. The county invokes a 2024 California law granting public health officers authority to inspect private immigration detention. Case pending in federal court. Surrounding the inspection lawsuit is a broader sanctuary-vs-federal conflict: the County's CLEAR ordinance restricting federal-immigration-agent access to county property (Jan 2026); ICE detainee transfers in defiance of county policy (Mar 26, 2026); seven reported rapes at Otay Mesa not being investigated by the Sheriff's office (Mar 24-26, 2026); and ICE/Border Patrol using the County Sheriff's gun range (Apr 21, 2026). Each strand is a separate accountability gap; together they illustrate how sanctuary policies erode at the operational level even when adopted at the policy level.

The Lawsuit (Core Fight)

San Diego County filed suit in federal court on March 10, 2026, after ICE blocked the county’s public health officer from inspecting the Otay Mesa Detention Center — a CoreCivic facility that has been the site of sustained complaints about freezing temperatures, medical neglect, contaminated food, and (per March 2026 reporting) seven alleged rapes. The lawsuit marks an unusual escalation: a county government invoking a state health law to assert oversight authority directly against a federal agency.

This is a distinct fight from earlier ACLU/detainee conditions litigation at Otay Mesa. This case turns on the threshold question of inspection access itself — whether California counties have the legal right to walk through the door at all.

What Happened on February 20, 2026

On February 20, 2026, San Diego County Public Health Officer Dr. Sayone Thihalolipavan arrived at Otay Mesa to conduct an inspection authorized under 2024 California law, which explicitly grants county public health officers the power to inspect private immigration detention facilities for health and safety compliance. ICE had initially confirmed the inspection. When Dr. Thihalolipavan and county officials arrived at the facility, ICE agents reversed the clearance and turned them away at the gate.

The same day, ICE also blocked U.S. Senator Alex Padilla and California state lawmakers from entering the facility — despite prior clearance. The two blockings are independent events on the same date but illustrate a coordinated agency posture: county, congressional, and state-legislative oversight all denied within a single 24-hour window.

County Counsel Damon Brown said the federal government’s refusal violates the Administrative Procedure Act because officials gave no lawful explanation for blocking a state-authorized inspection. DHS countered that the county failed to provide seven days’ notice to ICE — a procedural objection the county disputes.

The lawsuit names the County of San Diego, Public Health Officer Dr. Thihalolipavan, and County Counsel Damon Brown as plaintiffs.

What Prompted the Inspection

County officials cited “alarming reports from inside the facility,” including detainee accounts of:

Freezing temperatures in housing units
Untreated medical conditions
Food unfit for human consumption

Subsequent reporting in late March 2026 surfaced seven alleged rapes at the facility — incidents the San Diego County Sheriff’s Office was reportedly not investigating, with a private company contracted to handle the investigation instead. The rape allegations are part of why outside oversight is at stake; they cannot be assessed by a public-health inspection that ICE refuses to permit.

These conditions mirror findings at other CoreCivic facilities in the Southern District, including California City (see related entry).

Legal Theory

The county’s legal argument is straightforward: the 2024 California inspection law creates a state-law obligation on private detention operators and confers inspection authority on county public health officers. The APA claim asserts that ICE’s reversal was arbitrary and capricious — agency action without a lawful explanation. If the court accepts the county’s theory, it would establish a precedent that California counties can enforce state health inspection mandates even against facilities operating under federal contracts.

Surrounding Sanctuary-vs-Federal Conflicts

The inspection lawsuit is one strand of a broader, escalating conflict between San Diego County’s sanctuary policies and federal-immigration operations on county territory. As of May 2026:

CLEAR Ordinance (January 2026)

The County Board of Supervisors passed the CLEAR ordinance in late January 2026, restricting federal immigration agents’ access to county property. The ordinance was framed as a sanctuary-jurisdictional defense — limiting where ICE can operate when on county land, and what kinds of cooperation county employees may extend.

ICE Transfers in Defiance of County Policy (March 26, 2026)

Per inewsource reporting, ICE has continued to take custody of inmates from county jails in transfers that the County Board of Supervisors says violate county policy. The Sheriff’s Office’s compliance with the CLEAR ordinance is contested: the Board says the policy bars these transfers; the Sheriff has continued them.

ICE/Border Patrol Using Sheriff’s Gun Range (April 21, 2026)

Per inewsource reporting, ICE and Border Patrol have used a County Sheriff–operated gun range for federal-immigration-agent training. This is operational entanglement — a county facility used by federal agents — that the CLEAR ordinance was designed to address. Whether this use survives the CLEAR ordinance is contested.

Why These Strands Matter Together

Each surrounding strand is a separate accountability gap. The county passed a sanctuary ordinance; the Sheriff appears to be operating outside it (gun range, transfers). The county filed a federal lawsuit to enforce a state health law; ICE blocked the inspection. The Sheriff is not investigating reported rapes at the facility the inspection was meant to evaluate. Each thread is independent — but together they illustrate how sanctuary-policy adoption at the legislative level erodes at the operational level when the implementing agencies (Sheriff, federal contractors) are not aligned with the policy-making body (Board of Supervisors).

Timeline

2026-01 (late January): Board of Supervisors passes CLEAR ordinance restricting federal immigration access to county property
2026-02-20: Public Health Officer Dr. Thihalolipavan arrives at Otay Mesa — ICE reverses clearance, turns inspection team away. Senator Padilla and CA state lawmakers also blocked the same day.
2026-03-04: San Diego County announces intent to sue
2026-03-10: County files federal lawsuit against ICE/DHS/CoreCivic
2026-03-24 to 2026-03-26: Reports surface that the County Sheriff’s Office is not investigating seven alleged rapes at Otay Mesa; private company investigating instead
2026-03-26: ICE continues taking custody of inmates from county jails in transfers the Board of Supervisors says violate the CLEAR ordinance
2026-04-02: U.S. Reps. Mike Levin and Sara Jacobs tour Otay Mesa as part of separate congressional oversight visit. Levin: “How much of that was for us, versus how much is the standard, ordinary course of how they conduct business day in and day out?”
2026-04-12: Op-ed (Times of San Diego) calling for Sheriff to investigate the alleged rapes
2026-04-21: ICE / Border Patrol documented using the County Sheriff’s gun range
2026 (ongoing): Federal inspection-access case pending; surrounding sanctuary-vs-federal-operations conflict continues

Conditions Documented

Detainees report freezing temperatures, untreated medical conditions, spoiled food
Facility routinely over capacity: averaging 1,456 vs. contracted 1,358; exceeded 1,600 on some days. This is the contractual-capacity-vs-operational-overcrowding pattern at Otay Mesa.
82% of detainees have no criminal convictions
Families describe “torture and negligence,” overcrowding, malnourishment, no specialist access
Seven alleged rapes (March 2026 reporting)

Key Actors

Dr. Sayone Thihalolipavan: San Diego County Public Health Officer; named plaintiff
Damon Brown: San Diego County Counsel; named plaintiff; articulated APA legal theory
Terra Lawson-Remer and Paloma Aguirre: San Diego County Supervisors leading the inspection-access fight
San Diego County Board of Supervisors: Authorized the lawsuit; passed CLEAR ordinance January 2026
CoreCivic: Facility operator (defendant in the lawsuit)
ICE/DHS: Defendants
Senator Alex Padilla: blocked from entering February 20, 2026
U.S. Reps. Mike Levin, Sara Jacobs: conducted separate April 2 oversight visit
San Diego County Sheriff’s Office: Subject of separate accountability questions on rape investigations and gun-range use

Why This Fight Matters

Otay Mesa is one of CoreCivic’s highest-profile facilities — and one of the most scrutinized for conditions abuses. The 2024 California inspection law was specifically designed to create an accountability mechanism that couldn’t be blocked by the federal contract shield. ICE’s reversal upon the inspectors’ arrival — after initially clearing them — is a stark demonstration that the agency views even state-law health oversight as negotiable. The county’s willingness to file suit, rather than accept the rebuff, tests whether California’s inspection framework has real teeth or is merely aspirational.

The surrounding sanctuary-policy-erosion pattern (CLEAR ordinance vs. continued sheriff operations) is significant beyond San Diego: it illustrates the implementation gap that all sanctuary jurisdictions face when local sheriffs operate semi-autonomously from the county legislative body. The ordinance is the policy; the operational layer is where the policy lives or dies.

Cross-References

Contractual Capacity vs. Operational Overcrowding mechanism (cascade-research) — Otay Mesa’s 1,456 average vs. 1,358 contractual is another instance of the documented pattern
California City CoreCivic conditions (sister fight entry; same operator, similar conditions reporting)
CoreCivic organization profile — see industry section

Sources

Federal lawsuit

CLEAR Ordinance + Sanctuary Erosion

Rape Investigation Failure

Other Coverage and Context

This research is published at The RAMM — investigative reporting on the detention pipeline.

Edit Report issue County profile Add a tip about this fight