County Fight Litigation

Geauga County OH — ACLU sues to force release of secret ICE contract

Geauga, OH FIPS 39055

Current status: Ohio Supreme Court ruled for sheriff Apr 2 2026 on date-range technicality (sheriff affidavit said no contracts executed in the requested window, while acknowledging a March 2024 U.S. Marshals contract just outside that window); ACLU notes court did NOT find the contracts exempt from public records law

The Fight

Geauga County has refused to release its contract with ICE to house immigration detainees, claiming that only ICE can authorize release of the agreement. The ACLU of Ohio filed suit in May 2025 asking the Ohio Supreme Court to issue a writ mandating disclosure, arguing the contract between two public entities is a public document. On April 2, 2026, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled unanimously (per curiam) for the sheriff — but on a narrow procedural ground rather than reaching the question of whether ICE contracts are exempt from public records law.

Key Details

March 12, 2025: ACLU Chief Policy and Advocacy Officer Jocelyn Rosnick sent a public records request to Geauga County Sheriff’s Office for contracts, drafts, and memorandums with DHS, ICE, and U.S. Marshals Service covering June 1, 2024 to March 3, 2025
April 8, 2025: Sheriff’s office asserted records “prohibited by federal law”
May 20, 2025: ACLU of Ohio filed mandamus action in Ohio Supreme Court (State ex rel. Rosnick v. Geauga County Sheriff)
County position: Only ICE can release the contract (federal law restriction claim)
ACLU position: Contract between two public entities is a public record under Ohio law
August 2025: Ohio Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, ordered evidence and briefs
April 2, 2026: Ohio Supreme Court ruled per curiam for Sheriff Scott Hildenbrand. The sheriff’s office submitted a records-clerk affidavit stating it had executed NO contracts with DHS, ICE, or U.S. Marshals during June 1 2024 – March 3 2025. The same affidavit acknowledged a U.S. Marshals contract executed March 20 2024 / effective April 1 2024 — just outside the requested window. The court held Rosnick “has not established by clear and convincing evidence that the sheriff’s office possesses records responsive to her public-records request that it has failed to produce.”
ACLU response (Apr 2026): “Although we’re disappointed with this outcome, it’s critical to note that the court did not find the requested contracts to be exempt from public records requests.”
Operational facts (Apr 2026): Geauga Safety Center holds ~37 ICE detainees daily (capacity 182); county received ~$1.2 million in past year at $100/detainee/day; one of six Ohio jails contracting with ICE
Forum: Ohio Supreme Court (writ of mandamus denied)
Significance: Test case for transparency of ICE detention agreements nationally — the door remains open for a re-filed records request scoped to dates that capture the actually-existing contracts (e.g., the March 2024 USMS contract, or any ICE IGSA in force during 2025-2026 operations)

Cross-reference: Accountability-Darkness Mechanism

This fight is a textbook local-layer instance of the accountability-darkness-as-detention-precondition mechanism (see cascade-research/mechanisms/accountability-darkness-as-detention-precondition.md). The substance of the contract was never adjudicated; the sheriff prevailed by submitting a sworn affidavit narrowly true within a 9-month window while admitting a contract existed 11 days before that window opened. The county is operationally housing 37 ICE detainees daily and collecting ~$1.2M/yr — yet the public is told there is no responsive record to disclose.

This parallels:

Federal layer: Madan FL/TX disclosure-suppression directive
State layer: TN DOS/THP records stonewalling
Local layer: Bradford FL agenda-stuffing; Roxbury NJ DHS court zig-zag; Geauga OH date-range affidavit

The Geauga pattern adds a distinct sub-tactic: temporal scoping — using the records-clerk affidavit as a procedural shield while the underlying contract remains undisclosed. Importantly, the Ohio Supreme Court explicitly declined to bless the substantive secrecy claim; that question is preserved for a future, properly-scoped request. This makes Geauga both an active accountability-darkness instance AND a viable re-litigation target.

Ohio context (Tick 2 + 4)

Columbus OH passed 287(g) ban + detention moratorium in April 2026 in response to ICE Operation Buckeye (Dec 2025, 280+ arrests in central Ohio)
Franklin County Sheriff Baldwin continues ICE cooperation despite Columbus city policy (city-county split)
ACLU of Ohio’s March 2026 report documents expanding ICE partnerships with Ohio law enforcement
Geauga is one of two original Ohio ICE detention sites (with Seneca); Seneca released six years of invoices, Geauga still refuses contract terms

Sources

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

Edit Report issue County profile Add a tip about this fight