A federal judge has issued a nationwide injunction halting several Trump administration immigration policies, including measures that allowed arrests at immigration courts and removed limits on how long some immigration detainees could be held.
Get today's headlines by email 
In a 71-page ruling issued Tuesday, Judge P. Casey Pitts found that the policies were arbitrary and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. He said officials from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Executive Office for Immigration Review failed to provide adequate justification for the changes.
Court Arrest Policy Challenged
The challenged policy permitted federal agents to arrest noncitizens appearing before immigration judges. The practice began during the Trump administration and allowed ICE officers to take individuals into custody while they were attending immigration court proceedings.
The policy has drawn criticism from community groups and Democratic lawmakers, who argue that courthouse arrests have created fear within immigrant communities and led to tense confrontations outside courtrooms.
Pitts rejected the government's rationale, writing that ICE was not arresting people for unrelated criminal or civil violations but was instead detaining noncitizens based on the same immigration matters for which they had appeared in court.
The judge said the policy rested on a “false premise” that the government had properly withdrawn 2021 guidance limiting arrests at immigration courthouses. He concluded that officials had failed to provide a rational explanation for eliminating those restrictions.
Detention Policy Also Struck Down
Pitts also blocked a separate detention waiver that allowed ICE to hold detainees for more than 12 hours after arrest.
According to the ruling, some detainees at an immigration facility in San Francisco were held longer than 12 hours, including overnight and, in some cases, for several days.
The judge found that the policy violated detainees' Fifth Amendment rights because they were subjected to what he described as punitive conditions of confinement. He also said ICE had not adequately considered alternatives to address detention-capacity problems that prompted the policy.
Administration Pushes Back
The ruling drew a sharp response from the Department of Homeland Security.
DHS General Counsel James Percival argued on social media that individuals ordered removed by immigration judges should be taken into custody, comparing the process to criminal defendants being detained after sentencing.
He described the decision as judicial activism that undermines immigration enforcement.
Similar Ruling in New York
The California decision follows a separate ruling issued last month by Judge P. Kevin Castel, who barred federal agents from making immigration arrests at courthouses in Manhattan.
Castel similarly concluded that the administration's decision to withdraw previous limits on immigration court enforcement actions was “arbitrary and capricious.”
Join the discussion? 
Already a member? 
Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 24 June 2026
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment