A federal judge in California delivered a significant blow to the Trump administration’s immigration policies by annulling nationwide ICE directives that permitted widespread arrests of migrants within immigration courts. Judge P. Casey Pitts of the Northern District of California District Court issued the ruling in the class-action case Carmen Aracely Pablo Sequen et al. v. Sergio Albarran et al. The decision restores restrictions that had been in place for years, limiting civil arrests at immigration court locations to exceptional circumstances only.
What changed
Judge Pitts determined that ICE and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) acted in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner by implementing new policies without providing a reasoned justification or considering their negative impacts. The judge issued a nationwide injunction blocking the practice across the United States.
The decision voids several key ICE directives nationwide, restoring restrictions that limit civil arrests in courts to exceptional circumstances. The only arrests that are justified are those that involve a threat to national security or public safety, pose an imminent risk of violence or involve an imminent risk of evidence destruction in a criminal case.
The court also found that ICE and EOIR acted in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner by implementing new policies without providing a reasoned justification or considering their negative impacts. After the new policies took effect in 2025, civil arrests of immigrants in migration courts increased significantly. Data cited in the decision indicate that in the San Francisco area, detentions rose from being rare to nearly 50 per week.
Why it matters
This ruling restores meaningful protection for noncitizens appearing at immigration court hearings. Immigration attorneys who testified in the case described a “chilling effect” caused by the presence of ICE agents in courts, which led to a dramatic drop in migrants attending their own hearings, directly affecting their access to due process.
For practitioners, this decision changes how you advise removal-defense clients. You can now counsel that appearing at routine immigration court hearings—master calendars, status reviews, merits hearings—does not carry the civil arrest risk that has existed over the past 18 months. Clients can attend their hearings without fear of ICE detention, except in the narrow circumstances the court identified (national security, public safety threat, imminent violence risk, or imminent evidence destruction in a criminal case).
The impact is nationwide. The injunction covers all immigration courts across the United States, not just specific locations. This means your clients anywhere in the country benefit from the same protection.
Way forward
- Advise removal-defense clients immediately that they can safely appear at immigration court proceedings without risk of civil ICE arrest (barring national security or public safety exceptions).
- Update your intake forms and initial consultations to reflect that the prior chilling effect has been judicially reversed—court appearance is no longer a trap.
- Preserve evidence of past damage, if relevant to any pending case: the court found that the presence of ICE in courts caused missed hearings and due-process violations. If your client suffered prejudice under the old policy, document that for any motion to reopen or other remedy.
- Monitor for appeal. The Trump administration may seek to appeal Judge Pitts’ decision. Verify the current status of any appeal before finalizing your court-appearance strategy.
Disclaimer
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Folaform is a software platform for immigration professionals, not a law firm. You should consult with a licensed immigration attorney to discuss how this ruling applies to your specific case and jurisdiction. Immigration policy and court decisions can change without notice. Always verify your understanding against the primary source—in this case, the full text of Judge Pitts’ decision—and any updates issued by USCIS, EOIR, or ICE regarding implementation of this nationwide injunction.