A federal judge Thursday blocked part of a new Colorado law that deals with inspections at immigration detention centers, at least until a contract between private prison operator The GEO Group and U.S. Immigration and Enforcement expires in October.

The lawsuit stems from GEO Group's challenge to the new Colorado law requiring immigration detention center safety inspections, which the company argued overstepped state authority.

U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Domenico granted a partial preliminary injunction against House Bill 26-1276 after GEO, which operates the state’s only immigration detention center, sued over its constitutionality. Domenico’s order voids a section of the law that allows health departments to conduct unannounced inspections at least four times per year and imposes hefty fines for refusal. That section unfairly targets a federal contractor and goes beyond holding GEO to the same standards as other prisons and detention facilities in the state, Domenico wrote.

The Aurora facility has been a focus of scrutiny, including when a Colorado representative was denied entry to the detention center in a separate incident.

“

Image

The Defendants do not dispute that, by focusing on immigration-related facilities, HB-1276 is limited to facilities that by their nature are carrying out federal policies, or that in fact it only applies to GEO’s Aurora facility and nowhere else in the state,” Domenico wrote. “Indeed, state law prohibits state facilities from assisting in immigration-related detention. The bill therefore facially singles out federal activity for state regulation. That is typically enough for preemption.”

In a hearing last month, lawyers for the state argued that Colorado has an interest in regulating the conditions of people detained within its borders. But that does not outweigh GEO’s interest in its own constitutional protections, Domenico wrote.

Domenico’s order keeps intact sections of the law that clarify county inspection authority and allow the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to create new staffing and record keeping requirements for the facility. He wrote that because CDPHE hasn’t started the lengthy rulemaking process for those new requirements, GEO is not at risk of imminent harm from those provisions and a preliminary injunction is not necessary. But if the state begins enforcing that section, the analysis might change, he wrote.

Image

The preliminary injunction will expire with GEO’s current contract on October 15.

“The provisions of any new contract that GEO (or another operator) obtains from the federal government may alter the analysis significantly, or make proceeding further with this case unnecessary at all,” Domenico wrote.

GEO is still subject to other state-imposed health and safety regulations.

The case is not the only legal dispute between GEO and the state government. Earlier this week, Attorney General Phil Weiser sued the company over its noncompliance with a state public health order about a tuberculosis case in the Aurora facility. State and local public health officials have tried for months to obtain relevant information to complete a statutorily-mandated investigation into the case. While HB-1276 dealt in part with inspections and public health investigations, the state relied on long-standing public health laws about tuberculosis for its case this week.

“Today’s ruling granted GEO Group a narrow, temporary injunction against one provision of a new 2026 law—not the broad relief it sought—and leaves Colorado’s existing public health and safety authority intact,” Wesier said in a statement. “Separately, our lawsuit filed yesterday seeks to enforce that existing authority and require GEO to cooperate with the state’s investigation into tuberculosis at the Aurora facility, and we will continue using every available tool to protect the health and safety of Coloradans.”