A 71-page ruling by U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts struck down nationwide Trump-era policies that broadened immigration courthouse arrests and let ICE hold detainees in short-term cells for up to 72 hours.
Pitts said ICE and the Justice Department’s immigration court office acted arbitrarily and capriciously, failing to give reasoned explanations for scrapping prior limits as required by the Administrative Procedure Act.
The order effectively restores Biden-era rules that limited courthouse arrests to narrow cases such as national security threats, imminent danger and hot pursuit, and capped short-term detention at 12 hours.
The case was brought by an asylum seeker arrested after a routine San Francisco immigration hearing, and the ruling cuts into a broader Trump deportation push that has intensified since his return to office last year.
Homeland Security general counsel James Percival blasted the decision on X as judicial activism, signaling the administration is likely to keep fighting the setback.
How will this nationwide ban on courthouse arrests reshape federal immigration enforcement across the country?
What does this ruling signal about the judiciary's power over executive agencies under evolving legal doctrines?
Judge Pitts’ 2026 Nationwide Ban on ICE Courthouse Arrests: Legal, Social, and Political Implications
Overview
On June 23, 2026, Judge P. Casey Pitts issued a nationwide order blocking ICE courthouse arrests, immediately reversing the 2025 policy that allowed such actions. This ban restores courthouses as sanctuaries for justice, ensuring individuals can attend legal proceedings without fear of detention. As a result, ICE loses a convenient place for detaining noncitizens and must rethink its enforcement strategies. The ruling is expected to increase court attendance among immigrants, improve access to justice, and reduce the chilling effect that discouraged participation in legal matters. This marks a significant shift in immigration enforcement and legal protections.