San Diego reps conduct surprise visit at Otay Mesa Detention Center, but hit new oversight snag

After a monthslong legal battle, members of Congress representing San Diego County on Monday conducted a surprise oversight visit of the Otay Mesa Detention Center where more about 1,000 immigrants are being held. 

The unannounced inspection marks the first at the facility since a federal judge in Washington, D.C., blocked a Trump administration policy requiring congressional representatives to give seven days notice before visiting immigration detention centers. 

But while Democratic Reps. Mike Levin and Sara Jacobs were allowed into the facility this time without advanced notice, they hit a new oversight snag: Immigration and Customs Enforcement would now be putting more restrictions on lawmakers’ access to immigrant detainees.

Levin said the representatives were handed a memo during their visit signed by ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons and dated May 11 stating that the agency now requires lawmakers to identify the immigrants to the local ICE office two business days before they want to speak with them. 

“This is the same challenge that we’ve been facing with being able to visit without prior notice,” Levin said during a press conference after the visit. “We want to get a clear and transparent and accurate picture of what’s really going on in these facilities.” 

While the representatives were prevented from speaking to detainees during their last visit to Otay Mesa Detention Center the month before, they said the policy is a departure from past administrations. 

Levin said the policy will be “fought in the courts.” 

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said the policy does not stop members of Congress from meeting with immigrant detainees and that congressional oversight visits “without proper support” threaten the safety of detention staff, immigrants and visitors. 

In the memo, Lyons called the congressional oversight visits “disruptive and resource-intensive,” taking time away from detention staff and presenting scheduling challenges around legal visits and medical care. 

Lyons also criticized the behavior of congressional members and their staff, who he said were adding to the disruption by taking photos, refusing to hand over their devices, and refusing a security screening. Lyons did not specify in the memo when or where these incidents took place.

He also said there was no statute or regulation requiring ICE to facilitate meetings between members of Congress and detainees and that there were already “ample opportunities” for detained immigrants to speak with congressional offices, including during general visitation hours. 

“It is incongruous that ICE would allow congressional members or staff greater access to detainees that even their families enjoy,” Lyons said in the memo.  

During Monday’s visit, the representatives visited the detainee pods, medical center and law library and sampled the food and water. Similar to their findings from the visit last month when they gave advanced notice, they found that the facility was clean and conditions generally acceptable.

Jacobs also noted some improvements from their last visit, including clearly labeled paperwork for reaching out to congressional representatives now available in each detainee pod. 

But Levin said there’s a “big disconnect” between what they see in their visits and what they hear from detainees. Both lawmakers said they have received complaints about access to water and its quality as well as detainees who are fearful that filing a grievance against the facility would lead to retaliation. 

“We know that what we’re seeing is only a snippet of time and only certain areas,” Jacobs said. 

Monday’s visit and the new policy from ICE are the latest developments in an ongoing battle between the elected officials trying to gain greater access to immigration detention centers and the immigration officials seeking it to restrict it. 

While Democratic lawmakers claimed a win in Judge Jia M. Cobb’s decision finding the seven-day policy unlawful, it may be short-lived. 

The Trump administration has already filed an appeal and asked the court to pause Cobb’s decision from taking effect, which would have prevented the lawmakers’ oversight visit. 

The panel denied the administration’s request. But the appeals judge issuing the order said the government was ultimately likely to succeed in its appeal, which argued that lawmakers who challenged the policy don’t have standing to sue. 

Update, 3 p.m. Tuesday, May 12: This story has been updated to include comment from the Department of Homeland Security.