US, June 24 : A federal judge in California has invalidated a nationwide policy that allowed immigration related arrests at court facilities, marking another legal setback for the Trump administration’s enforcement measures.
US District Judge Casey Pitts ruled that the government failed to provide adequate justification for abandoning a long-standing practice that generally avoided arrests at immigration courts. In his decision, Pitts said federal agencies acted without proper consideration of the consequences, particularly the effect such actions could have on individuals appearing for legal proceedings.
The judge noted that the Administrative Procedure Act requires government agencies to explain and support significant policy changes. According to the ruling, officials did not sufficiently address concerns that the threat of arrest could discourage people from attending scheduled hearings.
Pitts emphasized that while agencies are free to adopt policies of their choosing, they must offer reasoned explanations for those decisions. He said the administration’s actions reflected a failure to meet that legal standard.
The ruling follows a similar decision issued in New York in May, though that order was limited to the state. The latest judgment extends across the United States, effectively blocking enforcement of the policy nationwide.
The Department of Homeland Security sharply criticized the decision. James Percival, the department’s general counsel, argued that authorities should be able to detain individuals immediately after immigration judges order their removal, describing the ruling as an example of judicial overreach.
Following President Donald Trump’s return to office, immigration enforcement officers frequently coordinated with government attorneys to make arrests after court proceedings concluded. In many instances, cases were dismissed before plainclothes agents detained individuals inside or near courthouse premises.
The court also raised concerns about reports that some detainees were held in nearby facilities beyond the permitted 12-hour limit. Pitts concluded that the government’s approach failed to comply with procedural requirements governing federal agency actions.