Judge issues final ruling against ICE immigration court arrest policy in Manhattan

The U.S. district judge found the agency’s arrests of migrants at routine court appearances throughout Manhattan arbitrary and capricious.MANHATTAN (CN) — A federal judge granted summary judgment on Thursday to migrant rights groups who sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement over the agency’s controversial arrests at immigration courthouses.U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel already blocked ICE from making these scrutinized arrests in New York City, barring limited circumstances. But in his new 36-page order, he finds the practice was wholly arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.The government didn’t even try to argue otherwise, according to the George W. Bush appointee — he found its briefs “are silent as to whether the policy is arbitrary and capricious.”Prior to the second Trump administration, ICE historically veered away from such detentions amid fears they could discourage dutiful court attendance. Castel initially greenlit the practice last September, siding with the agency that an agency memo from May 2025 justified them.But earlier this year, ICE admitted in court that the memo didn’t actually justify these arrests at all. Federal prosecutors apologized to the judge for the “material mistaken statement of fact that the government made to the court” when previously arguing otherwise. Without that legal backing, Castel flipped his ruling in May and blocked ICE from continuing to make these arrests in three Manhattan immigration courts.The judge found the agency now appears to have “no policy whatsoever” regarding these arrests and must continue to be precluded from making them.“In this court’s view, ICE’s policy as to arrests in immigration courthouses is that officers may exercise ‘unfettered discretion … with no guidance whatsoever,’” he wrote.Castel added: “The court rejects defendants’ argument that an arrest policy, or absence of an arrest policy, is beyond judicial review because the place of an arrest is left entirely to the discretion of the agency.”Additionally, prior to ICE acknowledging the 2025 guidance never applied to immigration courts at all, the agency never provided “an acknowledgment of or reasoned explanation for the change in policy” in the first place, according to Castel.“It is therefore arbitrary and capricious,” he wrote.New York Civil Liberties Union lawyer Amy Belsher, who represented the plaintiffs, called the ruling “an enormous win for every noncitizen seeking to safely attend their immigration court proceedings.”“For too long, we watched masked, often armed, ICE officers ambush noncitizens in courthouse hallways, throw immigrants to the ground, and tear sobbing children from their parents,” Belsher said in a statement. “But with today’s order, the Court made clear: ICE’s cruel, unjustified policy of conducting mass immigration arrests in courthouses is unlawful and cannot stand.”A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.The underlying case was brought by immigration groups African Communities Together and The Door, which claimed in a lawsuit last August that the arrests are “unreasoned and contrary to law.”“For decades, federal officials have avoided making civil arrests at courthouses for reasons recognized at common law and incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act: such arrests chill access to the courts and impede the fair administration of justice,” the groups argued.Since Castel’s block on the practice, arrests at Manhattan immigration courts have slowed significantly, but they haven’t stopped completely, according to the government. In at least one case, the agency made an arrest and released the detainee within 24 hours. In another, a federal judge found ICE made an arrest within the guidelines for Castel’s stated exceptions, based in part on the arrestee’s criminal history.The agency has also used anti-ICE protests as a way to justify making arrests at sensitive locations like immigration courts by arguing alternative areas would be “unsafe."The practice has been a contentious centerpiece of President Donald Trump’s broader immigration enforcement agenda around the country. Viral videos captured at Manhattan’s largest immigration court, 26 Federal Plaza, showed the sometimes violent practice in action. In one instance, ICE agents shoved and injured a photojournalist while making an arrest in the building’s 12th-floor hallway.Last June, then-New York City Comptroller Brad Lander was arrested while trying to escort someone through a crowd of ICE agents after their court hearing.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads