Prison Contractors and Shareholder Power: A Clash Over Human Rights

A group of Catholic investors, many led by Jesuit priests, recently challenged a private‑prison company that runs facilities for U. S. immigration authorities. The firm, which earned a large share of its 2024 revenue from contracts with the Department of Homeland Security, had voted against a shareholder proposal that would force it to publish an annual report on human‑rights compliance. The investors argued the company should be transparent about any role it plays in alleged violations. The firm, headquartered in Florida, has operated some of the biggest detention centers for ICE. In Texas and California alone it houses nearly 3, 600 people. Critics say conditions in these sites are harsh: limited sleep, little ventilation, and a lack of oversight. The priests’ group had earlier succeeded in getting the company to promise an annual human‑rights review, but now they claim that promise has been ignored. The proposal the priests filed asked the company to disclose whether its services contribute to violations of international law. It also cited a report that detainees were transported from one facility to an overseas prison. The company’s legal team rejected the proposal, labeling it “false and misleading” and arguing that its operations comply with U. S. law.The company said it had long engaged shareholders in discussions and that its disclosures evolve from those conversations. It also pointed to a 2019 SEC decision that let it skip the shareholder vote, a rule that was relaxed during the Trump administration. The investors are not large shareholders – their stake is only about $53, 000 – but they have used influence to sway other investors. They now accuse the company of cutting back on human‑rights reporting and of failing to explain how detainees are treated. One case cited is a Turkish student who spent 45 days in a facility with poor conditions, as reported in a popular magazine. The company maintains it has no role in granting access to ICE sites and that it provides medical care and legal support. It also stresses its long history of supporting law‑enforcement missions. The dispute highlights the tension between private contractors and public accountability, especially when detention centers become focal points for debates over human rights.