A federal judge blocked Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) detainment operations at immigration courthouses. Unlike previous rulings against such operations, this ruling applies nation-wide. The move halts what’s been one of the most aggressive parts of the government’s increasingly strict immigration enforcement policies.
For roughly a decade, federal guidelines limit civil arrests inside immigration courts. ICE increased the number of detainment operations starting in February, 2025. A later memo clarified federal agents don’t need permission from local authorities for local courthouse arrests.
According to the New York Times, the judge ruled immigration agents used an arbitrary and capricious decision-making process for deciding which cases warranted courthouse arrests. The ruling struck down a waiver ICE issued letting officers detain individuals in short-term holding rooms for seventy-two hours. Additionally, ICE based increasing detainment operations on a new policy that didn’t cover immigration courts.
Details Of The Ruling
The case is Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, decided June 23, 2026 by U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts of the Northern District of California. Judge Pitts found that ICE and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner when they scrapped the long-standing limits on courthouse arrests without adequately explaining the reversal, as required under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The order vacated three policies: two ICE directives that authorized civil arrests inside courthouses, including immigration courts, and an EOIR policy memo that similarly opened the door to enforcement actions in or near immigration courts. The ruling also struck down ICE’s “Nationwide Hold Room Waiver,” which had let agents detain people in short-term holding facilities for up to seventy-two hours, and sometimes longer, well beyond the twelve-hour limit that had applied for years. That twelve-hour cap is now back in effect.
A key part of the court’s reasoning: the new courthouse-arrest policies never addressed the “chilling effect” that arrests at courthouses have on attendance at immigration proceedings, even though that concern was central to the earlier guidance the government was abandoning. When people fear arrest simply for showing up to their hearing, some stop showing up, which can result in removal orders issued in their absence and undermine the fair administration of justice.
What It Means Going Forward
This is a trial court decision, and the government is expected to appeal. It doesn’t change the underlying immigration laws, and ICE retains its general enforcement authority. What it does is restore the pre-2025 restrictions on where and how civil arrests can happen at immigration courthouses, along with the twelve-hour limit on short-term holding.
As always, Immigration USA actively monitors ongoing U.S. immigration news. If you have questions about any U.S. immigration related issue, contact us. Working with an experienced attorney ensures you get the right advice based on the most recent laws. In an ever-evolving immigration policy landscape, we’re with you every step of the way.