The memo indicated that “ICE officers or agents may conduct civil immigration enforcement actions in or near courthouses when they have credible information” that a targeted person would be “present at a specific location.\u201d<\/p>\n
But, the Justice Department said in the court filing, the memo \u201cdoes not and has never applied to civil immigration enforcement actions in or near\u201d immigration courts.<\/p>\n
The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. <\/p>\n
![\"ICE](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/260325-ice-agents-nyc-vsb-2019-5f1b14.jpg\")
Federal agents detain a person after an immigration court hearing in New York.Mostafa Bassim \/ Anadolu via Getty Images file<\/p>\n
In a filing Wednesday, the immigrant rights groups that brought the case challenging the administration\u2019s tactics of arresting immigrants at mandated court hearings said the implications of the Justice Department’s disclosure “are far-reaching.”<\/p>\n
In a statement, Amy Belsher, a New York Civil Liberties Union attorney for the plaintiffs, called the development a “shocking revelation.”<\/p>\n
“It is yet again another example of ICE\u2019s brazen disregard for the lives of immigrants in this country,” Belsher said. “It is now clearer than ever that there is no justification for ambushing and arresting people who are showing up to court.\u201d<\/p>\n
The government said in its filing that it became aware of the mistake Tuesday when it received an email that was sent to ICE personnel as a \u201creminder that the May 27, 2025, Guidance does not apply to Executive Office for Immigration Review (Immigration) courts, regardless of their location.\u201d <\/p>\n
Prosecutors did not say why they also received the ICE email.<\/p>\n
Prosecutors said they informed the immigration rights groups that brought the case about the mistake. <\/p>\n
The U.S. district judge presiding over the case, Kevin Castel, had rejected the groups\u2019 request to block the administration\u2019s courthouse arrests. In the ruling, Castel said ICE\u2019s guidance \u201callowed arrests at or near an immigration court.\u201d<\/p>\n
In its filing Tuesday, the Justice Department repeatedly apologized to Castel for a “material mistaken statement of fact that the Government made to the Court and Plaintiffs” when it argued on behalf of the immigration agency. <\/p>\n
\u201cBased on our discussions with ICE today, this regrettable error appears to have occurred because of agency attorney error,\u201d prosecutors wrote.<\/p>\n
As of Wednesday night, Castel had not entered a response in the case\u2019s public docket.<\/p>\n
As a result of the mistake, prosecutors acknowledged, the court’s Sept. 12 opinion and order and the plaintiffs’ briefs “will need to be reconsidered and re-briefed for the Court to adjudicate Plaintiffs\u2019 APA [Administrative Procedure Act] claims against ICE on the merits.”<\/p>\n
Prosecutors said they received approval from ICE counsel before they filed every brief and made any oral arguments to the court and plaintiffs in the case.<\/p>\n
Even though the government was withdrawing parts of its briefs that relied on the ICE memo, prosecutors wrote, the withdrawal “does not affect its arguments that ICE\u2019s immigration courthouse arrests do not violate any so-called common-law privilege against courthouse arrests.” <\/p>\n
The Trump administration\u2019s tactic of detaining immigrants at scheduled hearings has sparked outcry. In May, Dylan Contreras, a New York City public school student with no criminal history, was detained after a routine hearing<\/a>. Contreras, who was 20 at the time and pursuing a green card after having arrived from Venezuela, was released this month<\/a>. <\/p>\n DHS said that Contreras entered the U.S. during the Biden administration and that ICE was “following the law and placing these illegal aliens in expedited removal, as they always should have been.”<\/p>\n His lawyers argued Contreras was seeking asylum. <\/p>\n