Judge: Aurora ICE Detainee at “Real Risk” of Unlawful Deportation

(COLORADO) A federal judge has found that a man held at the Aurora ICE facility faces a “real risk” of unlawful deportation, underscoring fresh concerns about due process and detention conditions at the privately run center east of Denver. The decision, issued in 2025, arrives as the facility’s operator, GEO Group, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) face mounting questions from lawmakers and civil rights groups about medical care, transparency, and the treatment of people in civil custody.

The man at the center of the ruling has mental health conditions and, according to court records, has been kept inside the facility almost without interruption since late 2024. He reportedly left the building only once, for a court hearing in August 2025. The judge’s finding points to gaps in how deportation cases are handled inside detention, where people can struggle to gather evidence, reach attorneys, or track changes to their cases.

Judge warning and facility history

The Aurora ICE facility has drawn public attention for years. In 2019, the ACLU’s report “Cashing in on Cruelty” described deaths, abuse, and medical neglect at the center. In 2024, a wrongful death lawsuit accused staff and contractors of failing to diagnose and treat a detainee’s blood clot, adding to claims that medical care remains unsafe inside Aurora.

Those allegations remain in dispute, but they continue to shape public debate over the site’s operations and the role of private prison firms in civil immigration detention.

GEO Group manages the complex under contract, part of a national system where ICE relies on private corporations to hold people while their cases move forward. Critics say that model pushes cost-cutting over care. Specific concerns raised by advocates and relatives include:

• inconsistent health screenings
• slow emergency response
• limited access to outside doctors
• staffing and language access problems
• delayed mental health care and missed appointments or medications

Several Colorado lawmakers who toured the facility in recent years say they want stronger rules and tougher audits, especially for medical services.

ICE standards and compliance disputes

ICE says it follows national detention standards on food, housing, and medical care. The agency publishes those guidelines online, including the versions that apply to facilities like Aurora. Readers can review ICE’s detention standards here: https://www.ice.gov/detention-standards.

While standards exist on paper, on-the-ground compliance remains the core dispute in Aurora. Attorneys and advocates report delays for mental health care and other services, and describe how people in detention can struggle to:

• attend regular outside appointments
• coordinate effectively with legal teams
• gather and transmit crucial evidence and records

Civil rights lawyers say these problems are common, and that people with mental health needs face extra hurdles because treatment and case preparation must happen at the same time inside secure settings that limit movement and privacy.

The judge’s “real risk” finding highlights how legal rights can be difficult to exercise from inside detention, and how procedural gaps can lead to severe, even permanent, consequences.

Expansion plans, federal funding, and concerns

In July 2025, the ACLU and ACLU of Colorado released internal records obtained through FOIA litigation. The documents show ICE’s plans to expand detention in Colorado, including the Denver area, as part of a national push funded by a $45 billion congressional appropriation.

Key details and concerns:

• The expansion would raise total daily detention across the country to more than 100,000 people.
• The ACLU warns that adding beds without fixing known problems will:
  • stretch medical teams
  • increase isolation
  • put more people at risk at facilities like Aurora
• Analysts (e.g., VisaVerge.com) note the expansion reflects a broader federal shift toward larger civil detention capacity while many asylum and deportation cases remain backlogged.
• Advocates argue that increasing bed capacity without addressing case backlogs may leave people waiting longer in detention, worsening stress and health risks and reducing incentives to use community-based alternatives.

Congressional oversight dispute

The fight over access has sharpened in Congress. During July and August 2025, Democratic members, including Rep. Jason Crow, reported being blocked from unannounced inspections of Aurora. Lawmakers said ICE was enforcing a seven-day notice policy for visits, even though federal law allows congressional oversight without advance notice.

Timeline and actions:

1. Lawmakers initially said they were blocked from unannounced inspections.
2. After pushback, Colorado Democrats arranged a scheduled tour on August 11–12, 2025.
3. Rep. Crow, joined by Diana DeGette, Joe Neguse, and Brittany Pettersen, reported:
   • the center felt “like a prison,” despite its civil status
   • they were denied basic information, such as how many people were being held that day
   • the visit appeared staged to show only select areas

ICE has not publicly answered recent questions about the oversight policy or the denial of same-day visits. Agency officials typically argue that safety and operational needs require coordination. Lawmakers counter that effective oversight depends on the ability to:

• arrive unannounced
• speak privately with detainees and staff
• review records on site

Without that access, they say, verifying claims about care, discipline, or use of segregation is difficult.

The wrongful death lawsuit and medical accountability

The 2024 wrongful death lawsuit continues to cast a long shadow. It alleges that Aurora medical staff failed to properly check, diagnose, and treat a detainee’s blood clot until it was too late.

Concerns raised by the lawsuit and related cases:

• how emergency symptoms are recorded, triaged, and escalated inside the facility
• gaps in tracking and follow-up that can also appear in mental health care
• missed appointments or delayed evaluations that harm outcomes and affect case preparation

Courts will decide the factual questions in the wrongful death suit, but the litigation has increased scrutiny on emergency protocols, recordkeeping, and medical oversight at Aurora.

Guidance for families and attorneys

For families outside the walls, these disputes are immediate and stressful. Relatives describe long waits for updates, language barriers, and confusion about sending medical records or arranging visits.

Practical steps that lawyers recommend:

• keep copies of all health documents and records
• list medications clearly with dosages
• ensure your attorney can reach you by phone
• if care is denied or delayed, ask your lawyer to:
  • request records
  • raise the issue with facility leadership in writing
• if someone is in immediate danger, call 911 from outside and contact the attorney at once

The role of private contractors and the path forward

The role of GEO Group remains a central question. Supporters of private contracts say large firms can scale staffing and logistics to meet federal needs. Critics argue that profit motives and cost pressures can erode care and encourage corners to be cut.

In Aurora, those tensions appear in repeated reports about:

• staffing levels
• language access
• medical wait times
• delays in mental health services

The judge’s “real risk” finding adds legal weight to concerns that people can be moved or deported before they have a fair chance to make their case.

Looking ahead:

• The $45 billion expansion push suggests more people could pass through Aurora ICE facility in the coming year.
• Civil rights groups plan to continue using FOIA to obtain records and timelines.
• Colorado’s congressional delegation is expected to press for more access and unannounced inspections.
• Pending litigation, including the wrongful death lawsuit, may force changes to medical protocols and recordkeeping if courts find failures.

Policy options under discussion include limiting private prison contracts in civil immigration detention or expanding community-based supervision; others favor increased detention to manage border flows and court attendance. As of August 2025, no major policy shifts had been enacted.

The judge’s warning is a clear signal: legal errors inside detention can move fast, and the cost for the person at the center can be permanent. People detained at Aurora must currently rely on existing standards, their attorneys, and public pressure to protect their rights.