Speaking after a meeting with local leaders from both counties, Shapiro called the federal government’s move “secret” and said the projects would create major infrastructure, healthcare, and public safety burdens in the communities where they are proposed.
“I don’t want either of these sites here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,” Shapiro said, adding that while the federal government has broad power, Pennsylvania “is not powerless” and he intends to use “every tool” at his disposal to oppose the facilities.
Bipartisan meeting with local officials
Shapiro said he met for roughly an hour and a half with county commissioners, state lawmakers, and subject matter experts from Berks and Schuylkill counties to discuss what he described as the likely impact of two “massive” detention centers. Reports on the event said the meeting was held in Berks County, and included local officials from both counties.
Shapiro also highlighted the bipartisan nature of the opposition, saying the concerns raised cut across party lines.
“Run out of water within 24 hours” in Tremont area, Shapiro says
A central focus of Shapiro’s remarks was infrastructure - particularly water and sewer capacity.
He said officials described a scenario in the Tremont area where, if the Schuylkill County facility were built, the local system could “literally run out of water within 24 hours,” impacting nearby households that rely on the same system.
Shapiro criticized suggestions that water could simply be trucked in, saying it would not be feasible at the scale required and would also require trucking out wastewater, adding heavy traffic and wear to local roads.
Concerns over healthcare, EMS, and 911 capacity
Shapiro said the proposed facilities would also strain healthcare and emergency response, describing shortages of nurses and existing pressure on local systems. He warned that adding thousands of detainees could pull resources away from current residents or create gaps in care for those held at the facilities.
He also said local fire and EMS coverage, including volunteer staffing, would be taxed by a project of that size, and that 911 systems could be impacted.
Permits and enforcement: Shapiro points to state “tools” but won’t preview specifics
When asked what Pennsylvania could do to block the facilities, Shapiro pointed to potential regulatory steps through agencies including the Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Health, and Department of Labor & Industry. He said the facilities would require permits and other approvals from the Commonwealth, and that his administration is examining them.
However, he declined to outline specific legal actions in advance, saying his administration would be “prepared” to take steps in the coming weeks.
Questions about transparency and federal response
Shapiro said local officials expressed frustration with what he described as a lack of transparency from federal agencies, noting that leaders in both counties said they learned details after deeds were filed.
In response to questions about federal communication, Shapiro said county commissioners told him they had participated in teleconferences set up through their congressman’s office, but left those meetings dissatisfied with the answers they received.
Shapiro pushes back on “jobs” argument
Shapiro also responded to claims that the projects could bring thousands of jobs, saying Pennsylvania’s economy is already growing and that ICE facilities would undermine community economic development and trust.
What’s next
Shapiro said he will continue coordinating with local leaders and state agencies as his administration evaluates potential legal and regulatory steps to prevent the projects from moving forward in Pennsylvania.