A federal judge has issued a nationwide injunction blocking the Trump administration from arresting migrants at immigration courts, ruling that the policy violates the Administrative Procedures Act. U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts of the Northern District of California stated in a 71-page decision that policies enacted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) were "arbitrary and capricious."
"Because the record before the Court demonstrates ICE and EOIR failed to provide reasoned explanations for their actions, the Court concludes that each of the challenged policies is arbitrary and capricious in contravention of the APA," Judge Pitts wrote. The Justice Department had sought to limit the block to the Northern District of California, but the judge's ruling applies nationwide.
The practice of arresting migrants at immigration courts had drawn criticism from lawmakers and advocacy groups, who reported that individuals were often apprehended after their deportation cases were dismissed. Deportation hearings are legal proceedings initiated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to determine if a migrant should be removed from the United States. Immigration judges may dismiss a case to allow an individual to pursue legal relief, such as asylum, or DHS attorneys may request dismissals if the individuals are not a priority for removal. Attorneys have stated that the Trump administration had been using dismissals as a means to detain individuals at immigration courts and place them into expedited removal proceedings without allowing them to contest their cases.
Historically, ICE has prioritized courthouse arrests of individuals deemed public safety risks or those accused or convicted of certain crimes. The Trump administration had contended that an executive order allowed for the implementation of this policy. However, Judge Pitts found no connection between the administration's stated rationales for the policies and the expansion of arrests at immigration courthouses. He noted that government disclosures revealed that an ICE memo cited to justify the policy did not, in fact, apply to civil immigration enforcement actions in or near immigration courts.
James Percival, the DHS general counsel, described the ruling as "anti-American" and "naked judicial activism in service of an anti-American, open borders agenda," asserting that individuals ordered removed by an immigration judge should be taken into custody, similar to defendants sentenced by a criminal court.