Justice Department lawyers admitted in court this week that a key defense used to justify immigration arrests was based on false information, stunning legal analysts and raising the possibility of serious consequences.
According to Slate’s Amicus podcast, DOJ attorneys acknowledged they had made a “material mistake” while defending Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests of migrants outside immigration courts.
For months, government lawyers argued that ICE was following official policy when detaining migrants after hearings.
“Now the DOJ admitted that this policy ‘does not and has never applied’ to immigration courts—meaning that its core defense of the agents’ conduct had been fabricated all along, according to Slate.
The admission came after U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel previously sided with the government, relying in part on that now-discredited claim.
Co-hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern told listeners on Friday that the fallout from the Trump DOJ’s “latest catastrophe” could be severe.
“I think civil contempt is a real possibility, and criminal contempt may not be off the table,” Stern said. He added that the department’s “lie sat at the heart of the case,” and “carries heinous real-world consequences.”
“So, in this instance, because of these unique and idiosyncratic facts, it really is quite possible that somebody’s head is going to roll,” he said.
Lithwick added that the revelation stands out because of the scale of the error and its potential impact on the case.
“I think part of the reason this feels so big and momentous is not only because the lie itself was so egregious and so long-running—and even now sweeps in the judge—but also because it could actually reverse the outcome of the case itself,” she said.