In a landmark decision, a federal judge has put an end to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests at courthouse hearings and extended detentions in short-term holding cells. The ruling, issued by Judge P. Casey Pitts of the Northern District of California, applies nationwide and marks a significant shift in immigration enforcement practices.
The decision expands upon a temporary order from, which initially prohibited these practices in Northern California. This latest ruling comes in response to a lawsuit filed by asylum seekers and supported by various civil rights organizations.
Background of Courthouse Arrests
Courthouse arrests gained national attention last year, with dramatic scenes of ICE agents apprehending individuals during routine hearings. These incidents were particularly notable in locations like 26 Federal Plaza in New York and the main immigration court in San Francisco where protests erupted in response to the arrests.
The practice of courthouse arrests had been largely discontinued in San Francisco since. However, it persisted in other regions, including New York and Texas. When immigrants were arrested after their hearings, they were often held in short-term detention cells for several days before being transferred to long-term facilities. This led to legal challenges, including a demand to limit detention times to no more than 12 hours.
The Shift in ICE Policies
In, ICE and the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review reversed years of guidance against courthouse arrests. They issued a policy allowing agents to conduct civil immigration enforcement actions in or near courthouses whenever they believed a noncitizen would be present, not just those posing a public safety threat.
ICE had previously required its agents to ensure that no one was detained in a holding facility for longer than 12 hours. However, as enforcement increased, the number of people in detention significantly rose. In June 2026, the agency announced that field offices nationwide could begin detaining individuals for up to three days or longer in exceptional circumstances.
The Judge’s Ruling and Its Implications
Judge Pitts found that neither of these policy changes was backed by clear reasoning required by Congress’ Administrative Procedures Act. He described the practices as arbitrary and capricious, effectively banning both courthouse arrests and extended detentions. The ruling was hailed as a significant blow to some of the Trump administration’s most extreme immigration enforcement tactics.
“The courthouse is meant to be a refuge for the pursuit of justice, not a hunting ground for ICE,” stated Jordan Wells, a senior attorney at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area. “No one, immigrants included, should be forced to choose between their liberty and their day in court.”
The Department of Homeland Security responded to the ruling, criticizing it as judicial activism in service of an open borders agenda. Legal scholars expect the Trump administration to challenge the ruling, which could be reversed by an appellate court at any time.
