Which ICE and CBP detention facility projects have received construction awards or contracts since the One Big Beautiful Bill passed?

1. The money and the process: what the law authorized and how DHS moved

The reconciliation package allotted roughly $45 billion for ICE detention expansion and about $5 billion specifically for CBP facilities and checkpoints, creating both an immediate procurement imperative and a fast-track contracting environment that agencies began using quickly after the bill’s passage ^{[5] [6] [1]}.

2. Named detention facilities that reporting shows have been awarded contracts, reopened or reactivated

Multiple outlets document that ICE moved to resume operations or expand capacity at specific sites: the 2,400-bed Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Dilley, Texas, was resumed under CoreCivic; Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, operated by GEO Group, was reopened; contracts or proposals have also targeted reopening or reactivation of a Leavenworth, Kansas facility (reported as a potential 1,033-bed site); and the Dilley and Karnes family detention centers were among earlier reopenings cited by reporting ^{[1] [2]}.

3. Contract awards and contractor names called out in reporting

Investigations and contract analyses identify CoreCivic and GEO Group as primary beneficiaries, with both companies publicly projecting higher revenue tied to OBBBA-era contracts and reporting specific new or expanded awards in 2025–2026 ^{[2] [4]}. State-level procurement reviews — for example, Facing South’s analysis — name Louisiana-based contractors receiving firm awards for emergency detention centers, including LaSalle Corrections (contract worth up to $125 million) and Lemoine Disaster Recovery (up to $83.8 million) alongside other local contractors working on detention-related projects ^[3].

4. Scale and corporate disclosures: how companies describe the business opportunity

Private operators have publicly framed the bill as a revenue windfall: GEO Group and CoreCivic signaled record contract pipelines and increased revenues tied to ICE solicitations, and industry-focused reporting and watchdog groups say firms have already been awarded multiple contracts or contract modifications that reopen idle facilities or expand bed capacity ^{[2] [4] [1]}.

5. CBP facility projects: less granular public reporting but clear funding lines

While the statute earmarked roughly $5 billion for CBP facility construction and improvement, reporting to date focuses more on the funding allocation than on a definitive list of awarded CBP construction contracts; DHS and CBP have publicly discussed broad hiring and facility plans and some contract opportunities, but detailed, published award lists for CBP construction projects are not fully laid out in the sources reviewed ^{[5] [6] [7]}.

6. Caveats, gaps and why a definitive public list is elusive

Available sources provide multiple concrete examples and company disclosures but are not an exhaustive procurement ledger: watchdogs and news outlets have tracked prominent awardees and reopened sites, yet comprehensive federal contract databases, agency obligation reports, or a centralized DHS public accounting linking every OBBBA dollar to a named construction award are not fully detailed in the reporting provided here, so any list compiled from these sources will be partial ^{[3] [1] [2]}.

7. Incentives, stakeholders and competing narratives

Advocates and watchdogs emphasize a “deportation-industrial complex” and point to political donations and industry readiness to profit from rapid contracting ^{[8] [2]}, while DHS and agency officials emphasize hiring, rapid scale-up and national security rationale and note they face operational constraints in building and staffing new facilities ^{[6] [9]}; both perspectives are present in the reporting and help explain why private firms with idle capacity were first to receive awards or modifications ^{[10] [7]}.