ICE lawyers gave false information to justify detaining thousands, filings reveal

Key Takeaways

• Federal court filings say ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) lawyers acknowledged a memo they previously relied on did not authorize arrests near immigration courts.
• The disclosure came in a lawsuit by the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) challenging ICE’s practice of arresting people as they leave immigration court hearings.
• Plaintiffs argue the arrests have blocked thousands from pursuing immigration relief; prosecutors warned a judge that the government’s prior representations were in error.
• The admission could affect a prior denial of preliminary relief and may influence ongoing litigation about enforcement at or near immigration courts.

What the filings say

Federal prosecutors filed documents saying lawyers for ICE acknowledged that a May 2025 agency memo the government had cited when defending its practice “does not and has never authorized” arrests of noncitizens as they exited immigration courts. The acknowledgment, included in filings tied to a lawsuit brought by the NYCLU and other civil rights groups, follows earlier government submissions that had relied on the memo to explain and defend the arrests. An assistant U.S. attorney, Tomoko Onozawa, told the presiding judge, Kevin Castel, that the error had come to light late in the litigation and expressed regret for the mistake.

Legal and policy implications

The lawsuit seeks to stop ICE from targeting noncitizens who are attending immigration court hearings — a practice plaintiffs say prevents people from pursuing relief such as asylum, adjustment of status, or other immigration benefits. The NYCLU argues ICE has provided no legal justification for the arrests; that is a claim by the plaintiff organization. “Preliminary relief” — an initial court order to halt a challenged practice while a case proceeds — had been denied in part based on the government’s representations. The prosecutors’ admission undermines those representations and may give plaintiffs grounds to ask the judge to reconsider that denial or order new relief while the case continues.

Human impact

Thousands of people have been allegedly arrested after attending court, and the NYCLU says many were then detained in facilities hundreds of miles from their lawyers and home communities, making it harder to pursue their immigration cases. For someone navigating the immigration system now, this means increased legal uncertainty: attending a hearing — a required step in many removal proceedings — could carry the risk of arrest, disrupting access to counsel and the ability to gather evidence. It has been reported that these arrests are part of a broader enforcement push tied to the current administration’s expanded detention and deportation efforts.

Source: Original Article