COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2022
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal Proceedings The nature of CoreCivic's business results in claims and litigation alleging that it is liable for damages arising from the conduct of its employees, offenders or others. The nature of such claims includes, but is not limited to, claims arising from employee or offender misconduct, medical malpractice, employment matters, property loss, contractual claims, including claims regarding compliance with contract performance requirements, and personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with CoreCivic's facilities, personnel or offenders, including damages arising from an offender's escape or from a disturbance at a facility. CoreCivic maintains insurance to cover many of these claims, which may mitigate the risk that any single claim would have a material effect on CoreCivic's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows, provided the claim is one for which coverage is available. The combination of self-insured retentions and deductible amounts means that, in the aggregate, CoreCivic is subject to substantial self-insurance risk. Based upon management's review of the potential claims and outstanding litigation, and based upon management's experience and history of estimating losses, and taking into consideration CoreCivic's self-insured retention amounts, management believes a loss in excess of amounts already recognized would not be material to CoreCivic's financial statements. Adversarial proceedings and litigation are, however, subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable decisions and rulings resulting from legal proceedings could occur which could have a material impact on CoreCivic's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows for the period in which such decisions or rulings occur, or future periods. Expenses associated with legal proceedings may also fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on changes in CoreCivic's assumptions, new developments, or by the effectiveness of CoreCivic's litigation and settlement strategies. CoreCivic records a liability in the consolidated financial statements for loss contingencies when a loss is known or considered probable, and the amount can be reasonably estimated. If the reasonable estimate of a known or probable loss is a range, and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other, the minimum amount of the range is accrued. If a loss is reasonably possible but not known or probable, and can be reasonably estimated, the estimated loss or range of loss is disclosed. When determining the estimated loss or range of loss, significant judgment is required to estimate the amount and timing of a loss to be recorded. Any receivable for insurance recoveries is recorded separately from the corresponding litigation reserve, and only if recovery is determined to be probable and the amount of payment can be determined. CoreCivic does not accrue for anticipated legal fees and costs and expenses those items as incurred. ICE Detainee Labor and Related Matters. On May 31, 2017, two former ICE detainees, who were detained at the Company's Otay Mesa Detention Center ("OMDC") in San Diego, California, filed a class action lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint alleged that the Company forces detainees to perform labor under threat of punishment in violation of state and federal anti-trafficking laws and that OMDC’s Voluntary Work Program ("VWP") violates state labor laws including state minimum wage law. ICE requires that CoreCivic offer and operate the VWP in conformance with ICE standards and ICE prescribes the minimum rate of pay for VWP participants. The Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, exemplary damages, restitution, penalties, and interest as well as declaratory and injunctive relief on behalf of former and current detainees. On April 1, 2020, the district court certified a nationwide anti-trafficking claims class of former and current detainees at all CoreCivic ICE detention facilities. It also certified a state law class of former and current detainees at the Company's ICE detention facilities in California. The court did not certify any claims for injunctive or declaratory relief. On March 10, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted CoreCivic's petition to appeal the class certification ruling. On June 3, 2022, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit affirmed the class certification ruling. Following the three-judge panel affirmance, the Company petitioned the Ninth Circuit for a discretionary appellate review, and the Company currently awaits a ruling on the petition for such review. Since this case was filed, four similar lawsuits have been filed. A Maryland case was dismissed on September 27, 2019, and the dismissal was affirmed on appeal. Two suits filed in Georgia and Texas do not allege minimum wage violations; and the Texas case was voluntarily dismissed on March 14, 2022, while the Georgia case is still ongoing. A second California suit concerning the Otay Mesa facility has been stayed pending the outcome of class proceedings in the first. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to take all necessary steps to vigorously defend itself against all claims. Due to the stage of this proceeding, the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome, nor can it estimate the amount of loss or range of loss, if any, that may result. As a result, the Company has not recorded an accrual relating to this matter at this time, as losses are not considered probable or reasonably estimable at this stage of these lawsuits. Securities and Derivative Litigation. In a memorandum to the BOP dated August 18, 2016, the DOJ directed that, as each contract with privately operated prisons reaches the end of its term, the BOP should either decline to renew that contract or substantially reduce its scope in a manner consistent with law and the overall decline of the BOP's inmate population. Following the release of the August 18, 2016 DOJ memorandum, a securities class action lawsuit was filed on August 23, 2016 against the Company and certain of its current and former officers in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (the "District Court"), captioned Grae v. Corrections Corporation of America et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-02267. The Company settled this lawsuit in April 2021. The settlement, which was approved by the District Court on November 8, 2021, contains no admission of liability, wrongdoing, or responsibility by any of the defendants including the Company. The Company paid the settlement amount of $56.0 million in May 2021. As a result of the settlement, the Company recognized an expense of $54.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2021 (all of which was recognized in the first six months of 2021), which was net of the remaining insurance available under the Company’s policies. The Company is also named along with several of its directors in six derivative lawsuits which raise similar allegations to those raised in the Grae securities litigation, which are currently stayed by agreement of the parties. While the Company believes these lawsuits are entirely without merit, the Company acknowledges the costs and risks of extensive and complex litigation regarding these matters are substantial and subject to an unpredictable outcome. On June 17, 2022, the Company and derivative plaintiffs informed the District Court that the parties had reached an agreement as to the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and expenses. During the second quarter of 2022, the Company recognized an additional expense of $1.9 million to reflect its estimate of the probable liability associated with these matters. On September 19, 2022, the District Court issued an order (the "Preliminary Order") providing for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement of the claims asserted nominally on behalf of the Company against the individual defendants named in the previously disclosed stockholder derivative action. The settlement calls for the Company to adopt certain governance changes and to pay plaintiff’s counsel $3.5 million in attorneys’ fees. The Preliminary Order set a final settlement approval hearing for December 1, 2022. Considering amounts previously recognized for these matters, the Company had adequately accrued for this liability as of September 30, 2022.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2022

Legal Proceedings

The nature of CoreCivic's business results in claims and litigation alleging that it is liable for damages arising from the conduct of its employees, offenders or others. The nature of such claims includes, but is not limited to, claims arising from employee or offender misconduct, medical malpractice, employment matters, property loss, contractual claims, including claims regarding compliance with contract performance requirements, and personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with CoreCivic's facilities, personnel or offenders, including damages arising from an offender's escape or from a disturbance at a facility. CoreCivic maintains insurance to cover many of these claims, which may mitigate the risk that any single claim would have a material effect on CoreCivic's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows, provided the claim is one for which coverage is available. The combination of self-insured retentions and deductible amounts means that, in the aggregate, CoreCivic is subject to substantial self-insurance risk.

Based upon management's review of the potential claims and outstanding litigation, and based upon management's experience and history of estimating losses, and taking into consideration CoreCivic's self-insured retention amounts, management believes a loss in excess of amounts already recognized would not be material to CoreCivic's financial statements. Adversarial proceedings and litigation are, however, subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable decisions and rulings resulting from legal proceedings could occur which could have a material impact on CoreCivic's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows for the period in which such decisions or rulings occur, or future periods. Expenses associated with legal proceedings may also fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on changes in CoreCivic's assumptions, new developments, or by the effectiveness of CoreCivic's litigation and settlement strategies.

CoreCivic records a liability in the consolidated financial statements for loss contingencies when a loss is known or considered probable, and the amount can be reasonably estimated. If the reasonable estimate of a known or probable loss is a range, and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other, the minimum amount of the range is accrued. If a loss is reasonably possible but not known or probable, and can be reasonably estimated, the estimated loss or range of loss is disclosed. When determining the estimated loss or range of loss, significant judgment is required to estimate the amount and timing of a loss to be recorded. Any receivable for insurance recoveries is recorded separately from the corresponding litigation reserve, and only if recovery is determined to be probable and the amount of payment can be determined. CoreCivic does not accrue for anticipated legal fees and costs and expenses those items as incurred.

ICE Detainee Labor and Related Matters.

On May 31, 2017, two former ICE detainees, who were detained at the Company's Otay Mesa Detention Center ("OMDC") in San Diego, California, filed a class action lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint alleged that the Company forces detainees to perform labor under threat of punishment in violation of state and federal anti-trafficking laws and that OMDC’s Voluntary Work Program ("VWP") violates state labor laws including state minimum wage law. ICE requires that CoreCivic offer and operate the VWP in conformance with ICE standards and ICE prescribes the minimum rate of pay for VWP participants. The Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, exemplary damages, restitution, penalties, and interest as well as declaratory and injunctive relief on behalf of former and current detainees. On April 1, 2020, the district court certified a nationwide anti-trafficking claims class of former and current detainees at all CoreCivic ICE detention facilities. It also certified a state law class of former and current detainees at the Company's ICE detention facilities in California. The court did not certify any claims for injunctive or declaratory relief. On March 10, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted CoreCivic's petition to appeal the class certification ruling. On June 3, 2022, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit affirmed the class certification ruling. Following the three-judge panel affirmance, the Company petitioned the Ninth Circuit for a discretionary appellate review, and the Company currently awaits a ruling on the petition for such review. Since this case was filed, four similar lawsuits have been filed. A Maryland case was dismissed on September 27, 2019, and the dismissal was affirmed on appeal. Two suits filed in Georgia and Texas do not allege minimum wage violations; and the Texas case was voluntarily dismissed on March 14, 2022, while the Georgia case is still ongoing. A second California suit concerning the Otay Mesa facility has been stayed pending the outcome of class proceedings in the first. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to take all necessary steps to vigorously defend itself against all claims.

Due to the stage of this proceeding, the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome, nor can it estimate the amount of loss or range of loss, if any, that may result. As a result, the Company has not recorded an accrual relating to this matter at this time, as losses are not considered probable or reasonably estimable at this stage of these lawsuits.

Securities and Derivative Litigation.

In a memorandum to the BOP dated August 18, 2016, the DOJ directed that, as each contract with privately operated prisons reaches the end of its term, the BOP should either decline to renew that contract or substantially reduce its scope in a manner consistent with law and the overall decline of the BOP's inmate population. Following the release of the August 18, 2016 DOJ memorandum, a securities class action lawsuit was filed on August 23, 2016 against the Company and certain of its current and former officers in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (the "District Court"), captioned Grae v. Corrections Corporation of America et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-02267. The Company settled this lawsuit in April 2021. The settlement, which was approved by the District Court on November 8, 2021, contains no admission of liability, wrongdoing, or responsibility by any of the defendants including the Company. The Company paid the settlement amount of $56.0 million in May 2021. As a result of the settlement, the Company recognized an expense of $54.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2021 (all of which was recognized in the first six months of 2021), which was net of the remaining insurance available under the Company’s policies.

The Company is also named along with several of its directors in six derivative lawsuits which raise similar allegations to those raised in the Grae securities litigation, which are currently stayed by agreement of the parties. While the Company believes these lawsuits are entirely without merit, the Company acknowledges the costs and risks of extensive and complex litigation regarding these matters are substantial and subject to an unpredictable outcome. On June 17, 2022, the Company and derivative plaintiffs informed the District Court that the parties had reached an agreement as to the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and expenses. During the second quarter of 2022, the Company recognized an additional expense of $1.9 million to reflect its estimate of the probable liability associated with these matters. On September 19, 2022, the District Court issued an order (the "Preliminary Order") providing for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement of the claims asserted nominally on behalf of the Company against the individual defendants named in the previously disclosed stockholder derivative action. The settlement calls for the Company to adopt certain governance changes and to pay plaintiff’s counsel $3.5 million in attorneys’ fees. The Preliminary Order set a final settlement approval hearing for December 1, 2022. Considering amounts previously recognized for these matters, the Company had adequately accrued for this liability as of September 30, 2022.