Feds admit to misleading judge about ICE arrests at immigration courts

MANHATTAN (CN) — Federal prosecutors have admitted to misleading a judge about the legality of ICE arrests at immigration courts, which are being scrutinized by immigrant rights groups suing to stop the practice.

In a letter filed late Tuesday night, the government apologized to U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel for a “material mistaken statement of fact that the government made to the court” when arguing on behalf of the agency last year.

Federal prosecutors had repeatedly argued in this case that an ICE guidance memo from May 2025 justified the agency’s widespread arrests of people outside of immigration courts — which, until the second Trump administration, have historically been discouraged.

“ICE officers or agents may conduct civil immigration enforcement actions in or near courthouses when they have credible information that leads them to believe the targeted alien(s) is or will be present at a specific location,” the memo said.

But the government now concedes the memo actually “does not and has never applied to civil immigration enforcement actions” near immigration courts — only other courthouses.

The misrepresentation, prosecutors said, is on ICE itself, which they claim previously told them otherwise.

“The undersigned were specifically informed by ICE that the 2025 ICE guidance applied to immigration courthouse arrests,” the government wrote. “In addition, we discussed with and obtained the approval of assigned ICE counsel before filing every brief in this case and making any oral representations to the court and plaintiffs.”

“Based on our discussions with ICE today, this regrettable error appears to have occurred because of agency attorney error,” it added.

Prosecutors said they weren’t aware of this discrepancy until Tuesday, when they viewed an internal ICE email that told Enforcement and Removal Operations personnel the following: “This broadcast serves as a reminder that the May 27, 2025, guidance does not apply to Executive Office for Immigration Review (immigration) courts, regardless of their location.”

That directly contradicts what they told Castel when defending the agency, which could have big implications on the pending federal case.

Last year, immigration groups African Communities Together and The Door asked Castel to ban ICE from making arrests near immigration courts. But Castel, a George W. Bush appointee, rejected their request for a preliminary injunction, which would have stopped the practice.

Castel relied heavily on the 2025 memo in his ruling, writing explicitly in his 47-page order that the guidance “allowed arrests at or near an immigration court.”

The revelation that it, in fact, does not comes more than six months after Castel’s ruling.

“We deeply regret that this error has come to light at this late stage, after the parties have expended significant resources and time to litigate this case and this court has carefully considered plaintiffs’ challenge to the 2025 ICE guidance,” the government wrote Tuesday.

Federal prosecutors acknowledged that portions of this case, including Castel’s ruling in their favor, will need to be reconsidered and rebriefed as a result of the misrepresentation.

“The implications of this development are far-reaching,” Amy Belsher, a New York Civil Liberties Union lawyer representing the immigration groups, wrote in a Wednesday response. “In the months since the court relied on the government’s representation to deny plaintiffs preliminary relief, defendants have continued arresting noncitizens at their immigration court hearings, resulting in their detention — often in facilities hundreds of miles away.”

A spokesperson for the Southern District of New York, where the case is being tried, didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment, nor did the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE.

African Communities Together and The Door filed the lawsuit this past August, challenging the Trump administration’s “sweeping, unprecedented campaign of targeting noncitizens at their immigration court proceedings by denying them the right to seek relief from removal in the courtroom and summarily arresting them as they exit.”

The groups argue the practice, which has been a controversial centerpiece of President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement, discourages noncitizens from dutifully attending their immigration hearings amid fears that ICE agents could be waiting for them.

“These profoundly unfair practices undermine the rule of law and the integrity of immigration courts by effectively turning mandatory court hearings into traps,” the groups claim.

Many viral videos have captured it in action, including several from Manhattan’s immigration court at 26 Federal Plaza, where then-New York City Comptroller Brad Lander was arrested last summer while trying to escort someone through a crowd of ICE agents following their court hearing.

In another instance, ICE agents shoved and injured a photojournalist while making an arrest in the building’s 12th floor hallway.

Follow @Uebey Follow @uebey.bsky.social