ExploreRead
Immigration Without Due Process
Arrests After Hearings

Trump's ICE Arrested Asylum-Seekers Leaving Court and Allowed 72 Hours in Rooms Where Beds Are Banned

Select a Section to Explore

Chapter 1 — ICE Removed the Protections at Immigration Court

Chapter 2 — Appearing in Court Became a Route Into Custody

Chapter 3 — Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices

1 · ICE Removed the Protections at Immigration Court

1 · ICE Removed the Protections at Immigration Court — select a subtopic

1.1 — Trump's Orders Became Arrest and Detention Policies

1.2 — ICE Removed the Old Rules Without Replacing Them

1 · ICE Removed the Protections at Immigration Court
1.1 · ICE Removed the Protections at Immigration Court
Trump's Orders Became Arrest and Detention Policies

ICE arrested asylum-seekers leaving immigration hearings and authorized three days in holding rooms while retaining a ban on beds. The agencies acted under Trump's immigration enforcement orders. A federal judge vacated the policies nationwide because the agencies failed to explain the changes as federal law requires.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[1]Order on class certification and partial summary judgment, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 205 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J.
[2]Amended Complaint and Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Pablo Sequen v. Kaiser, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 32 (September 18, 2025), paragraphs 188-191
[3]Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion (January 20, 2025), 90 FR 8443
[4]Executive Order 14165, Securing Our Borders (January 20, 2025), 90 FR 8467
1.2 · ICE Removed the Protections at Immigration Court
ICE Removed the Old Rules Without Replacing Them

ICE's earlier policy limited courthouse arrests to urgent threats and other defined circumstances. Its new policies removed those protections at immigration courts. ICE later told its lawyers that the replacement rules did not cover immigration courts at all, leaving agents without internal limits there.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[1]Order on class certification and partial summary judgment, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 205 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J.

2 · Appearing in Court Became a Route Into Custody

2 · Appearing in Court Became a Route Into Custody — select a subtopic

2.1 — Three Asylum-Seekers Show What the Policies Did

2.2 — ICE Extended Confinement but Kept the Ban on Beds

2 · Appearing in Court Became a Route Into Custody
2.1 · Appearing in Court Became a Route Into Custody
Three Asylum-Seekers Show What the Policies Did

ICE arrested Carmen Aracely Pablo Sequen and Ligia Garcia as they left immigration hearings. Agents spared Yulisa Alvarado Ambrocio because her nursing infant was with her, but the government conceded she was likely to be arrested at her next appearance. A former immigration judge described attendance in her courtroom declining after arrests increased. Pitts said people faced a choice between risking arrest by attending court and losing their opportunity to pursue asylum or other relief by staying away.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[1]Order on class certification and partial summary judgment, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 205 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J.
[3]Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion (January 20, 2025), 90 FR 8443
[5]Order Denying Motion for Stay Pending Appeal, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, ECF 217 (N.D. Cal. July 10, 2026)
2.2 · Appearing in Court Became a Route Into Custody
ICE Extended Confinement but Kept the Ban on Beds

ICE replaced its usual 12-hour hold-room limit with a nationwide allowance for 72 hours, longer in exceptional circumstances. It kept the rule prohibiting beds and other sleeping equipment. Pitts cited detainees held for three days and said denying civil detainees basic sleeping needs overnight was presumed to be punishment. ICE had not considered its duty to avoid that punishment.

Hold-room standard reproduced in Judge Pitts's June 23, 2026 order, page 64

sleeping apparatus are not permitted inside hold rooms

ICE Performance-Based National Detention Standards · June 23, 2026

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[1]Order on class certification and partial summary judgment, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 205 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J.
[3]Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion (January 20, 2025), 90 FR 8443

3 · Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices

3 · Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices — select a subtopic

3.1 — The Government's Best Defense Failed to Save the Policies

3.2 — The Appeal and the Claims About Detention Conditions

3.3 — The Charge Is Removing Safeguards to Expand Custody

3 · Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices
3.1 · Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices
The Government's Best Defense Failed to Save the Policies

The government defended courthouse arrests as legitimate enforcement and longer holding-room detention as a response to scarce detention beds and presidential release restrictions. Pitts accepted parts of its reasoning. He still vacated the policies because the agencies ignored hearing attendance, alternatives and their obligations to people in custody.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[1]Order on class certification and partial summary judgment, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 205 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J.
[5]Order Denying Motion for Stay Pending Appeal, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, ECF 217 (N.D. Cal. July 10, 2026)
[6]Government Opening Brief, Garcia et al. v. Kaiser et al., No. 26-4310 (9th Cir.), Dkt. 24.1 (submitted September 16, 2026; corrected copy filed September 21)
3.2 · Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices
The Appeal and the Claims About Detention Conditions

The government appealed Pitts's policy judgment. Plaintiffs separately alleged failures in medical care and other detention safeguards. Plaintiffs alleged more than nine months of noncompliance. Their accompanying memorandum said there was no medical professional onsite and reported that detainees had been ignored by nurses after vomiting blood or while visibly bleeding after arrest. These remained allegations in support of the enforcement motion. The captured appellate docket shows no stay or merits ruling on the appeal through September 21, 2026; the captured district docket shows no ruling on the plaintiffs' motion through October 8, 2026.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[7]Order and Judgment under Rule 54(b), Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, ECF 212 (N.D. Cal. June 30, 2026)
[8]Docket, Garcia et al. v. Kaiser et al., No. 26-4310 (9th Cir.), CourtListener/RECAP, updated September 25, 2026; last entry September 21; captured October 10
[9]Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion and Motion to Enforce Preliminary Injunction, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, ECF 235 (October 1, 2026)
[10]Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Enforce Preliminary Injunction, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, ECF 236 (October 1, 2026), page 1
[11]Docket, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, CourtListener/RECAP, page 3, updated October 10, 2026; entries through October 8
3.3 · Enforcement Authority Did Not Excuse These Choices
The Charge Is Removing Safeguards to Expand Custody

Trump ordered expanded enforcement and detention. His agencies removed courthouse protections; ICE authorized longer confinement while retaining a ban on beds. A judge found the policies unlawful because the agencies failed to consider the people and proceedings their decisions would harm. That was an abuse of public power: making court attendance a route into custody while discarding safeguards for the people taken.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources
[1]Order on class certification and partial summary judgment, Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, No. 5:25-cv-06487-PCP, ECF 205 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J.
[3]Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion (January 20, 2025), 90 FR 8443
[4]Executive Order 14165, Securing Our Borders (January 20, 2025), 90 FR 8467

Full Source Index

Full Source Index — 11 Primary Sources

Primary Sources

Source Index