English Jesus Reyes Law Blog
ICE Courthouse Arrests: A Judge Halts Them at Immigration Courts
9 min read
A federal judge struck down the policy that allowed ICE courthouse arrests in and around immigration courts. In addition, the decision applies nationwide and takes effect immediately. However, it helps to understand exactly what it restores and, above all, what does not change in your case.
In brief: the decision on ICE courthouse arrests
The decision comes from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in African Communities Together and The Door v. Lyons, case number 1:25-cv-06366, before Judge P. Kevin Castel.
The final ruling is dated September 30, 2026 and was announced on October 1, 2026.
The judge found the 2025 policy change was "arbitrary and capricious," in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.
The ruling affirms and expands an earlier stay, so it now applies nationwide and takes effect immediately.
The rules of the April 27, 2021 policy return, titled "Civil Immigration Enforcement Actions in or near Courthouses."
That policy allows arrests in or near a court only in limited circumstances, listed below.
The lawsuit was filed on August 1, 2025. In March 2026, the government conceded that its own 2025 guidance had never applied to immigration courts.
The decision does not grant immigration status and does not cancel removal orders.
Important: you must keep attending every scheduled hearing. This decision does not change that obligation.
What did the judge decide about ICE courthouse arrests?
Specifically, he struck down the 2025 policy that had expanded civil arrests in or near courts. The judge vacated that guidance and restored the earlier rules, which are far more restrictive.
The scope is worth stating precisely. Indeed, the ruling affirms a stay the same judge had granted earlier. It then extends that stay across the country. That is, it is no longer limited to the Manhattan courts, as the May 2026 order had been.
Note: this decision comes from a district court, not the Supreme Court. Therefore, the government could appeal, and the issue is worth following.
Why was the policy allowing ICE courthouse arrests struck down?
Because the agency removed the earlier protections without adequately explaining why. That was the decisive point. The Administrative Procedure Act requires a federal agency to justify its policy changes. However, the judge concluded that did not happen here.
That is, in legal terms he called the change "arbitrary and capricious." It is the same standard appearing in other recent immigration litigation. It means the agency's decision does not hold up for lack of reasoning, not necessarily because of its content.
Likewise, there was a striking detail along the way. In March 2026, the government itself conceded that its 2025 guidance had never applied to immigration courts, despite what it had argued earlier.
Which rules govern ICE courthouse arrests again?
Specifically, those of the April 27, 2021 policy. It is an ICE interim guidance titled "Civil Immigration Enforcement Actions in or near Courthouses." That policy limits civil immigration arrests in and near courts.
Likewise, its stated purpose is to preserve access to justice. In fact, the underlying idea is simple: if people fear arrest when attending a hearing, they stop going, and that harms the whole system.
When can ICE courthouse arrests still happen?
In four specific situations. In addition, there is a fifth with conditions. The 2021 policy states this expressly, and the full list is worth knowing.
When it involves a national security threat.
When there is an imminent risk of death, violence, or physical harm to any person.
When it involves hot pursuit of an individual who poses a threat to public safety.
When there is an imminent risk of destruction of evidence material to a criminal case.
Source: ICE policy of April 27, 2021, as quoted in the court's opinion. Verified October 30, 2026.
Therefore, a fifth route exists. Outside of hot pursuit, an arrest may be permitted of a person who poses a threat to public safety, but only if both of the following conditions are met.
That a safe alternative location does not exist, or would be too difficult to carry out the arrest there.
That the action has been approved in advance by the designated officials.
Source: ICE policy of April 27, 2021, as quoted in the court's opinion. Verified October 30, 2026.
Careful: these exceptions are real. For that reason it is best not to read the news as an absolute guarantee that no arrest will happen.
Since when and where are ICE courthouse arrests limited?
Right away, and across the country. Both points are worth stating precisely. First, the ruling says the stay expands to apply nationwide. Likewise, it takes effect immediately. Before, the protection covered only the immigration courts in Manhattan.
Now, it helps to remember the case is still litigation. A district court decision can be appealed, so the picture could change. That is one reason we recommend not making final decisions based on this news alone.
How did the case get here?
Through more than a year of litigation. The sequence is worth knowing, because it explains why the ruling arrived in two stages.
April 27, 2021: ICE issues the policy limiting civil arrests in or near courts
January 21 and May 27, 2025: ICE issues two guidance documents expanding those arrests and rescinding the 2021 policy
August 1, 2025: The lawsuit is filed in the Southern District of New York
March 2026: The government concedes its 2025 guidance never applied to immigration courts
May 18, 2026: The judge stays the rescission of the 2021 policy, limited to the Manhattan courts
September 30, 2026: The final ruling issues, extending the protection nationwide Sources: the court's opinion in case 1:25-cv-06366 and press coverage of October 1, 2026. Verified October 30, 2026.
Therefore, what happened in September was not a surprise. Rather, it was the final stage of a process already underway.
What does this decision not do?
Three things. In fact, this is where most of the confusion lies. It does not grant immigration status to anyone. It does not cancel existing removal orders. And it does not eliminate your obligation to attend your hearings.
That is, the ruling changes where and when certain arrests can happen, not the merits of any case. For example, someone with a removal order still has it. Someone with a pending hearing still has it.
Important: missing an immigration hearing can bring an in-absentia removal order. You can see the consequences in our article on tourist visa revocations affecting asylum applicants.
Should you keep going to your hearings?
Yes, without exception. Indeed, this decision gives no one permission to miss one. In contrast, what it seeks is precisely the opposite: that people can attend their hearings without going becoming a risk.
Therefore, the correct reading of the news is encouraging but specific. You still have to appear, and now the setting for doing so has limits that did not exist before.
Is this related to the Supreme Court decision?
No, these are two different cases, and they are worth keeping apart because they happened weeks apart. Both touch immigration courts, but they resolve completely separate questions.
The ICE courthouse arrests case is the one this article explains. It comes from a federal district court in New York and concerns where and when civil arrests may take place.
In contrast, the Supreme Court's October 27 decision concerns administrative closure, that is, a judge's authority to pause a case. You can read about it in our article on tourist visa revocations affecting asylum applicants.
Note: one piece of news is favorable and the other is not. For that reason it is best not to mix them when assessing your situation.
What do we recommend given this decision?
We recommend three things. First, confirm the date and place of your next hearing. Then, show up. Second, if you have questions about how this decision affects your particular case, review them with an attorney before that date. And third, prepare anyway: knowing your rights remains the most useful thing.
At our firm, the review of your case happens in a consultation with attorney Jesús Reyes. Our consultations are not free. However, they allow us to analyze your file thoroughly and tell you honestly what legal alternatives exist in your situation. We also offer emergency consultations, which are scheduled sooner and cost more. You can schedule your consultation here.
You may also want to review our services for immigration court representation and cancellation of removal.
Frequently asked questions about ICE courthouse arrests
Are ICE courthouse arrests over at immigration court?
The restored policy limits civil arrests in or near courts, but it keeps specific exceptions, such as national security threats or an imminent risk of physical harm. That is, it is a strong protection, not an absolute one.
Does the decision apply in Florida?
Yes. Indeed, the ruling expands the stay so it applies nationwide, not only in New York. It took effect immediately.
Does this cancel my removal order?
No. Rather, the decision does not grant immigration status and does not cancel existing orders. It only restores limits on where and when certain arrests may occur.
Can I skip my hearing now?
No. You must keep attending every scheduled hearing. Missing one can bring an in-absentia removal order, which is a serious consequence and hard to reverse.
Can the government appeal?
Yes. That is, this is a decision of a federal district court, so it can be appealed. For that reason it is worth staying informed and not assuming the picture is final.
Where can I verify this information?
In the case's public docket and in the press coverage, which we link at the end. The case number is 1:25-cv-06366, in the Southern District of New York.
Conclusion
This decision restores a limit that matters a great deal in practice. In fact, for months many people faced an unfair dilemma. On one hand, attending their hearing and taking a risk. On the other, not going and losing the case. Neither was a real option.
Even so, the news is worth reading precisely. ICE courthouse arrests are limited, not entirely prohibited, and the case may keep moving. What does not change is the essential part: you must appear at your hearings. It is important that you know your rights and arrive prepared.
If you have a hearing coming up and want to review your situation, contact us. In addition, we handle cases worldwide from our office in Miami, Florida. We are here to advise you and review your specific case.
See also our frequently asked questions and the other updates on our blog.
