Trump-Appointed Judges Reject ICE's Mass Detention Strategy

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A POLITICO review found that 373 federal judges have rejected the Trump administration's effort to require detention without bond for anyone who crossed illegally into the United States, even if they've lived in the country for decades without incident. This contrasts with just 28 judges who have sided with the administration's view. The divide underscores the limits of a president's ability to control the jurists they appoint, as many Trump-appointed judges have ruled against the administration's mass detention strategy.

Why it matters

The Trump administration's push for expanded immigration detention has faced significant pushback from the federal judiciary, including judges appointed by Trump himself. This highlights the independence of the courts and their role in checking executive power, even when it comes to policies championed by the president who appointed them.

The details

The administration's mass detention strategy, implemented by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has been rejected by federal judges appointed by every president since Ronald Reagan. Judges who have ruled against the policy include Trump appointees such as Stephanie Haines of Pennsylvania, John Holcomb of California, and Fernando Rodriguez Jr. of Texas. These judges have also rejected key parts of the administration's efforts to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport immigrants without due process.

• In the past six months, dozens of judges have ruled against the administration's detention strategy.

What’s next

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals recently agreed with the slim minority of district court judges who have sided with the administration's detention strategy, a ruling that could lead to a Supreme Court case.