California and Santa Clara County have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to stop construction of what they say is a planned ICE holding facility near Gilroy, arguing that federal agencies moved ahead secretly and failed to follow environmental, land-use and public-notice requirements.
The lawsuit was filed by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security, the General Services Administration, several federal officials and ECG 6 LLC, a Beverly Hills-based company connected to the property.
The disputed site is located on Holsclaw Road in unincorporated Santa Clara County, near Gilroy. According to the lawsuit, the proposed facility would be roughly 18,700 square feet and could hold up to 150 detainees. The county and state argue the site is agricultural land protected under California’s Williamson Act and should not be converted into an immigration holding or detention facility without proper review.
DHS has pushed back on the characterization. A department spokesperson told The Center Square that the agency has “no new detention centers planned at this location.” However, DHS also said ICE is conducting law enforcement activity nationwide and is working to expand detention space.
TRENDING TODAY
That dispute over what the facility is actually meant to be is now central to the case. State and county officials say blueprints and planning documents suggest the site is more than ordinary office space. Public records and reported construction plans include labels such as “visitor room,” “interview room,” “man trap” and “ammunition/weapons suite.” Local officials say those details point to a federal immigration processing or short-term detention facility.
The General Services Administration, which handles federal buildings and leases, said it does not comment on active litigation.
Santa Clara County officials say they were not properly consulted before the project moved forward. They argue federal agencies concealed the real purpose of the development and failed to comply with laws including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act and California land-use protections.
County leaders also raised environmental and public-health concerns. The lawsuit alleges the site is near sensitive habitat, may affect endangered species, has limited waste-disposal capacity and contains hazardous materials connected to prior agricultural or research use. The complaint specifically references chemicals including thiram, ethidium bromide, calcium hypochlorite and acid-based wash water.
The state and county argue those conditions should have triggered a more thorough environmental review before construction began. They say the federal government cannot bypass legal requirements simply because the project involves immigration enforcement.
Gilroy Mayor Greg Bozzo said the city opposes the location of the facility, describing it as a poor fit for the community. The Gilroy City Council previously voted unanimously to oppose the project. Local officials say the surrounding area includes many immigrant families and agricultural workers, and that the prospect of an ICE facility has created anxiety in the community.
Santa Clara County Board Chair Otto Lee said the project has spread fear and was developed without transparency. County Counsel Tony LoPresti said Santa Clara County has a large immigrant population and a long history of litigation involving immigrant-rights issues.
The lawsuit is part of California’s broader legal conflict with the Trump administration over immigration enforcement. Bonta and other state officials have repeatedly challenged federal policies they say threaten immigrant communities or violate state and local authority.
Supporters of the lawsuit argue that the issue is not simply immigration policy, but the rule of law. They say federal agencies must comply with environmental review, land-use restrictions and public-notice requirements before building a facility that could affect residents, local infrastructure and protected farmland.
Federal officials are likely to argue that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility and that the site is being developed for lawful federal operations. DHS has denied that a new detention center is being built at the location, though the department did not provide detailed public clarification about the facility’s intended function.
The case may turn on what the court determines the project actually is, what federal agencies disclosed to local officials, and whether required environmental and administrative procedures were followed.
If the court sides with California and Santa Clara County, construction could be halted or delayed while federal agencies conduct further reviews or reconsider the site. If the federal government prevails, the project could move forward despite local opposition.
The lawsuit also raises a broader question: how much say should state and local governments have when federal immigration agencies build or lease facilities in their communities?
For Gilroy and Santa Clara County, the answer is that local governments must be consulted, especially when a facility may affect agricultural land, immigrant residents, public health and the environment. For the Trump administration, the project may be part of a larger push to expand immigration enforcement capacity across the country.
As the case proceeds, the court will have to weigh federal authority against procedural requirements and local environmental concerns.
For residents near Gilroy, the immediate concern is uncertainty. Construction has reportedly already begun, but state and county officials are asking the court to stop the project before it becomes operational.
Why It Matters
This matters because the lawsuit challenges the Trump administration’s effort to expand immigration enforcement infrastructure in California, a state that has repeatedly resisted federal immigration policies.
It also matters because the case involves more than politics. California and Santa Clara County say the project could violate environmental laws, agricultural land protections and public-notice requirements, while DHS denies that it is building a new detention center at the site.
What Comes Next
A federal court will decide whether to block construction while the lawsuit proceeds. California and Santa Clara County are seeking to halt the project and challenge the federal lease and development process.
The federal government may respond by defending the project as lawful federal office or enforcement space, while local officials are expected to continue arguing that the site is effectively an ICE holding facility that was developed without transparency.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County announced a lawsuit seeking to block construction of a proposed ICE facility near Gilroy, arguing the project violated land-use and environmental review requirements.
NEW: California Attorney General @AGRobBonta @RobBonta and Santa Clara County have filed California’s 71st lawsuit against the Trump Administration, seeking to block construction of a proposed ICE facility near Gilroy.
The lawsuit alleges the project violates multiple federal… pic.twitter.com/QmDU3dAZna
— Eytan Wallace (@EytanWallace) June 10, 2026
