Bureau Of Prisons Announces Multiple Facility Closures Citing Budget

Prison population over the years

For more than three decades, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has experienced almost uninterrupted growth. Fueled by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, mandatory minimum sentencing laws, the War on Drugs, and the repeal of federal parole, the federal prison population grew from just 24,640 inmates in 1980 to 219,298 inmates in 2013, nearly ninefold. Federal prisons became severely overcrowded, with many institutions operating far above their rated capacity, forcing the Bureau to expand existing facilities, build new prisons, and rely on contract institutions to house inmates.

That trajectory changed in 2013 when Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Justice Department’s Smart on Crime Initiative, a policy designed to reserve the toughest federal penalties for the most serious offenders while reducing the prosecution of some low-level, nonviolent drug cases. Holder predicted that the federal prison population would begin to decline for the first time in more than three decades, a prediction that proved accurate. Between 2013 and 2025, the BOP population declined by more than 64,000 inmates, reaching about 155,000 by the end of fiscal year 2025. Even with a modest post-pandemic recovery, the BOP currently houses about 154,000 inmates at 31 percent, nearly less than 30 percent.

Reshaping institutions

Past BOP Director Colette Peters as well tried to shut down some facilities towards the end of her term, but some of them were either delayed or postponed. One of them was FCI Dublin, a women’s facility known for its troubled past of sexual crimes against prisoners.

However, Director Marshall was forced to make sweeping changes to the BOP on short notice. First, the BOP canceled its collective agreement with the union in 2025, setting the stage for changes across the troubled service.

Director Marshall closed FPC Pensacola earlier this year, one of the oldest prison camps in the BOP, but has decided to reverse some of those closings, including FCI Morgantown and FPC Duluth. It also transitions FCI Aliceville from female to male and transfers female inmates to FCI Estill, a closed prison due to tornado in early 2020.

The closures have been announced

Director Marshall closed FCI Terminal Island earlier this year and the current announcement includes the following facilities:

• FCI Beaumont Low (Texas) – 1,651 inmates
• FCI Big Spring Low (Texas) – 617 inmates
• FCI La Tuna Low and Satellite Camp (Texas) – 712 inmates
• FCI Lexington Satellite Camp (Kentucky, women’s prison camp) – 232 inmates
• FCI Petersburg Low (Virginia) – 459 inmates
• FCI Taft (California, and defunct as of 2020)

In the announcement, the BOP released a statement from Director Marshall stating, “We are a Bureau that is taking action. These actions are necessary to address long-standing infrastructure and staffing challenges while ensuring that the Bureau remains focused on its core mission of operating safe, secure and efficient correctional facilities. We will support our workforce throughout this transition and to responsibly position the agency.”

In the same release, the BOP announced that two stand-alone prison camps, Morgantown (West Virginia) and Duluth (Minnesota) will change their missions to higher security (low security) prisons.

Human Tolls

The decision to close a prison is not just a budgeting exercise. It has profound consequences for the employees who work there and the inmates who call these institutions home.

Federal prisons are often among the largest employers in the communities they serve. Director Marshall emphasized that some affected employees will have opportunities to transfer to other Bureau of Prisons facilities in the same prison complex or nearby institutions. This may be possible in locations with many federal prisons, but the closings of facilities such as FCI Big Sandy in Kentucky and FCI La Tuna in Texas present a very different reality. Both institutions are located in relatively remote areas where comparable federal employment opportunities are limited. Many workers will face difficult choices between relocating their families, finding entirely new careers, or enduring long commutes to stay in the Office.

For prisoners, disruption can be just as important. Although prison life is highly structured, inmates establish routines, relationships with staff and other inmates, institutional jobs, educational programs, and family visitation programs. Closing these facilities will require the transfer of nearly 4,000 inmates to institutions across the federal system. For many, this could mean being housed hundreds or even thousands of miles away from home, making family visits more difficult and expensive. Decades of correctional research have consistently shown that maintaining family ties is one of the strongest predictors of successful reentry and lower recidivism rates.

The transfer process itself is rarely quick or easy. Detainees are usually transported by bus or through the Detainee and Alien Justice Transport System, often referred to as “Con Air.” Instead of moving directly to their new institution, many spend days or weeks passing through federal transfer centers and local detention facilities before reaching their final destination. During this time, communication with family is often limited, personal possessions may be delayed, and inmates face the uncertainty of adjusting to an entirely new institution. For thousands of inmates and their families, closing the prison isn’t just a change of address. It’s a major disruption to the stability they’ve worked to build while incarcerated.

Local economies where these closures take place will certainly be affected. Grocers, convenience stores, restaurants and those who supply goods to prisons will all see significant changes to their businesses.

As one former BOP union representative who did not want to be named and is no longer authorized to speak to the press told me, “This is going to be absolutely devastating.”

Tough Decisions Amid Bad Morale

Director Marshall has yet to testify before Congress, a marked departure from previous Bureau of Prisons directors who routinely appeared before congressional committees to defend the agency’s budget, staffing and operations. When that hearing takes place, prison closings will almost certainly be one of the most contentious issues. Members of Congress are understandably protective of jobs in their districts, particularly in rural communities where a federal prison can be one of the largest employers and a critical source of economic stability. While lawmakers are likely to press Marshall on the rationale for these closings, the reality is that they reflect difficult decisions driven by changing population trends rather than simple cost-cutting.

These decisions also come at a difficult time for the Bureau itself. The agency continues to struggle with chronic staff shortages, declining employee morale and the recent dissolution of its union relationship. Recruitment and retention remain persistent challenges, making correctional officer positions among the toughest jobs in the federal government. For employees placed in institutions that are slated to close, the uncertainty surrounding moves, relocations, or the loss of local employment only adds to these challenges.

At the same time, the BOP must adapt to a very different correctional landscape than it faced a decade ago. The First Step Act of 2018 has accelerated this trend by creating incentives for eligible inmates, particularly those housed in minimum and low security institutions, to earn time credits that allow for earlier placement in reentry centers or home confinement. As more inmates transition to the community before completing their full incarceration, the demand for traditional prison beds will continue to decrease while the demand for community-based programs will increase. The closing of correctional facilities is not simply a response to today’s inmate population, but a recognition that the federal penitentiary system is moving toward greater use of residences, house arrest, and other forms of community supervision.