More than 200 judges in hundreds of cases have rejected the Trump administration’s attempts to lock up immigrants facing possible deportation, and they're getting sick of hearing challenges to those "illegal" efforts, according to reports.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement set off a tidal wave of emergency lawsuits July 8 with a policy change that led to their targets being arrested at workplaces, courthouses and immigration check-ins, and at least 225 judges in more than 700 cases have ruled against President Donald Trump's administration – compared with just eight who sided with the new mass detention policy, reported Politico.
“The Court is unable to remain current on all new case authority supporting the Court’s conclusion, given the continued onslaught of litigation being generated by [the administration’s] widespread illegal detention practices,” wrote U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder, in a Nov. 21 ruling.
Judges have noted the sheer volume of rulings against the administration in their rulings, which reflects their growing exasperation with the litigation prompted by a policy that has been rejected over and over as unlawful.
“Dozens of district courts across the nation — with more each day — have rejected DHS’s expansion of … mandatory detention,” wrote U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill in a Nov. 19 ruling that released 17 people arrested during an ICE raid at a racetrack. “This court joins the overwhelming majority.”
There have been few broad attempts to block the ICE policy, but judges in Massachusetts and Colorado have recently certified class action lawsuits to challenge the detentions, and a California judge approved a nationwide class Tuesday that could immediately force the administration to provide bond hearings for detainees.
The Trump administration expressed confidence that appeals courts, and possibly the U.S. Supreme Court, would uphold the policy, saying they were forced to impose the detentions in response to Biden-era policies.
“President Trump and Secretary Noem are now enforcing this law as it was actually written to keep America safe,” said Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in a statement.
But judges have overwhelmingly disagreed, according to Politico's review of their rulings.
"The Trump administration broke from 30 years of precedent when it concluded that millions of immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for years could still be treated as 'seeking admission' to the country — subjecting them to mandatory detention typically only meant for new arrivals," Politico reported. "One judge said this was a logical fallacy akin to saying someone who snuck into a movie theater was still 'seeking admission' to the cinema, and dozens of judges have said the policy change defied a common sense reading of the law."