Inside NYC Immigration Courts, ICE Arrests Trigger New Legal Battle

NEW YORK, NY— Federal immigration officers arrested at least five people inside New York City immigration courts in recent weeks, prompting immigrant advocates to ask a federal judge to determine whether the arrests violated court orders that sharply limited the practice.

The legal fight centers on whether U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement followed guidance reinstated after two federal judges blocked the agency’s broader courthouse arrest policy.

ICE maintains the arrests complied with those rulings.

“ICE did NOT violate any court orders. These were lawful arrests,” an agency spokesperson said.

Attorneys representing immigrant advocacy groups disagree, arguing the arrests undermine protections ordered by the courts and could discourage immigrants from appearing for mandatory hearings.

Why Are Immigration Court Arrests Back?

In a declaration filed this week, Roberto Rodriguez, ICE’s acting supervisory detention and deportation officer, said officers determined immigration courts offered the safest place to make the arrests.

“At-large arrests in sanctuary cities like New York tend to trigger protests and intervention by agitators and bystanders, making alternative locations in New York unsafe and [the Executive Office of Immigration Review] the safest location for the arrests,” Rodriguez wrote. “ICE believes that a safe alternate arrest location does not exist or it would be too difficult to effectuate the arrest at an alternate location.”

Rodriguez said officers review law enforcement databases before scheduled immigration hearings and identify people for possible arrest.

He said ICE considers immigration courthouses “one of the safest locations in which an arrest could be conducted.”

What The Court Orders Allow

Federal judges did not prohibit all immigration courthouse arrests.

Instead, the rulings required ICE to return to guidance adopted in 2021 that permits arrests only under limited circumstances, including:

• Threats to national security.
• An imminent risk of death, violence or physical harm.
• Hot pursuit of someone who poses a public safety threat.
• Situations where no safe alternative arrest location exists or another location would make enforcement too difficult.

The dispute now before the court is whether ICE properly applied those exceptions.

Why Do Advocates Say The Arrests Crossed The Line?

In a June 29 letter to U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel, attorney Katherine Rosenfeld said advocates documented five courthouse arrests in Manhattan that raised “serious concerns” about ICE’s compliance with his order.

“ICE has also maintained a heavy presence in those courthouses on a near-daily basis, which contributes to precisely the intimidating effect that this Court found constitutes irreparable harm to plaintiffs,” Rosenfeld wrote.

She highlighted one arrest involving a man whose only criminal history stemmed from a federal trespassing charge tied to his entry into the United States.

“The government cannot reasonably contend that an individual whose sole criminal history stems from a charge arising from his entry into the United States poses a threat to public safety, necessitating his arrest at an immigration courthouse,” Rosenfeld wrote.

Who Did ICE Target?

ICE cited criminal histories as justification for the arrests but did not publicly identify those arrested in court filings.

An agency spokesperson said three of the people arrested had:

• A trespassing conviction.
• Charges of third-degree assault and criminal obstruction of breathing.
• Pending assault and attempted murder charges.

The City Reporter confirmed through Bronx District Attorney records that one man arrested inside immigration court on June 29 had been charged with attacking another man with a large kitchen knife. He had been released while the assault case remained pending.

ICE did not immediately provide details about the remaining two arrests.

What Happens If Someone Misses Immigration Court?

For many immigrants, appearing in immigration court is mandatory.

Failing to appear can result in an immigration judge issuing a removal order in the person’s absence.

How Did The Legal Battle Reach This Point?

Judge Castel ruled in May that the Trump administration’s expanded courthouse arrest policy violated federal law after evidence showed New York’s immigration courts became a primary location for enforcement actions.

During that litigation, federal attorneys acknowledged ICE lacked a formal policy supporting many courthouse arrests.

A federal judge in California later issued a similar ruling blocking most immigration courthouse arrests nationwide.

Neither decision eliminated the practice entirely. Both required ICE to follow the narrower 2021 guidance.

Two of the recent arrests, captured on video June 25 by photographer Christina Panagi, prompted attorneys with Make the Road New York to file emergency lawsuits seeking the men’s release.

How Has Enforcement Changed Across NYC?

A city audit ordered by Mayor Zohran Mamdani found federal immigration enforcement increased sharply during the opening weeks of 2025.

Between Jan. 20 and March 10, ICE arrested 5,567 people in the New York City region, a 71 percent increase from the same period under the previous administration, according to the report.

More than half of those arrests occurred at immigration court inside 26 Federal Plaza.

The audit also documented:

• Homeland Security officers entering city shelters seeking residents.
• Federal agents requesting information from city agencies.
• ICE officers attempting to inspect sign-in records inside a Brooklyn probation office.
• A 120 percent increase in immigration detainer requests sent to the Department of Correction.
• The NYPD receiving 3,672 immigration detainer requests during fiscal year 2025 while transferring no one to ICE custody in response.

The review also cited two Department of Investigation findings involving city employees who violated sanctuary law policies by assisting federal immigration authorities. The city said both cases resulted in corrective action.

What Changed After The Audit?

Mayor Mamdani’s Executive Order 13 created an interagency committee to review compliance with New York City’s sanctuary laws.

The audit led to new citywide protocols requiring agencies to:

• Document every immigration enforcement request.
• Report attempts by federal agents to enter city facilities.
• Review warrants before granting access.
• Train frontline employees on privacy laws and sanctuary policies.

The report said every mayoral agency completed Identifying Information Law training by April 7.

The federal court overseeing the courthouse arrest dispute has not yet ruled on whether the five recent arrests violated its earlier orders.