judge blocks – A federal judge in California blocked U.S. immigration authorities from arresting noncitizens at immigration courthouses and ordered limits on how long detainees can be held in short-term facilities, citing a chilling effect on the immigration system and “inhu
By Tuesday evening, the message from a federal judge was blunt: immigration court cannot become a place where people are suddenly grabbed.
U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts of the Northern District of California issued an order on Tuesday, June 23, stopping the Trump administration from arresting non–U.S. citizens at immigration courthouses. The ruling also limited how long noncitizens can be held in short-term detention facilities.
Pitts’s order came after a lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California challenging Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s practice of arresting noncitizens attending immigration court proceedings. The case also attacked the agency’s detention approach—holding people for sometimes days in facilities without a bed or other adequate accommodations.
In a 71-page decision, Pitts criticized the policy of making arrests at immigration court as having a “chilling effect” that could undermine the immigration system.
“The proper functioning of the immigration system depends on such noncitizens attending their scheduled removal proceedings,” Pitts wrote. “Thus. the chilling effect of courthouse arrests could undermine the proper enforcement of immigration laws even if it affected only noncitizens likely to be removed at the end of the process.”.
The judge also relied on testimony describing conditions at facilities designed for short detention. Pitts said witnesses testified that holding immigrants in spaces meant for only 12-hour detention had produced “inhumane” conditions. The ruling notes that noncitizens have testified to similar conditions at supposedly temporary ICE facilities across the country.
The case describes how the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration enforcement arm—ICE—expanded enforcement well beyond initial contacts. turning appearances at immigration court and routine reporting check-ins into what the filing called “dragnet arrest operations.” According to the lawsuit. the administration has also used short-term facilities to hold people for sometimes days. even when those facilities do not have beds and offer limited access to food and restrooms.
One lawsuit argument focused on the practical fallout for the system itself: if people fear arrests at courthouses. scheduled removal proceedings lose their reliability. Pitts’s order placed that risk at the center of the ruling. linking courthouse arrests to reduced compliance and undermined enforcement.
The Trump administration’s approach has drawn widespread criticism among immigration advocates, and they quickly celebrated Pitts’s decision. U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar (D–TX) called it “excellent news. ” saying in a statement that “Immigrants who show up to court — ‘the right way’ — have been targeted by this administration.” She added. “So glad to see this blatantly illegal and cruel policy struck down.”.
The Department of Homeland Security did not publicly outline its response in the immediate aftermath of the ruling. The Trump administration’s barring of courthouse arrests and limits on short-term detention time now stand as a direct constraint on how ICE can conduct enforcement at a critical stage of the removal process.
In the weeks and months leading up to the decision. ICE detentions and deaths have also kept pressure on federal oversight of detention conditions. Authorities previously reported that a Nicaraguan immigrant detained by ICE died while facing deportation in El Paso. underscoring how high the stakes remain for detainees in custody.