ICE: 26 Federal Plaza NYC Arrests Draw Court Injunctions

• U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests at New York City immigration courthouses, including 26 Federal Plaza, have surged under the second Trump administration.
• Historically, past presidents discouraged such arrests to ensure noncitizens attended mandatory legal proceedings.
• Despite a class action injunction from U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan and a separate ruling from Judge P. Kevin Castel largely barring courthouse arrests, ICE continues detentions under limited exceptions.
• This ongoing enforcement has transformed routine court appearances into moments of fear and uncertainty for immigrants and their families.
• Several thousand protesters marched through lower Manhattan on June 10, 2025, demonstrating against ICE arrests at 26 Federal Plaza.

When individuals face the risk of immediate detention upon entering a courthouse, the very foundation of a fair legal process is jeopardized.

Historically, presidential administrations discouraged the apprehension of noncitizens within immigration courthouses, a policy designed to ensure individuals could attend their mandatory legal proceedings without fear of immediate detention. This long-standing practice, however, has been significantly altered. Under the second Trump administration, this policy was effectively abandoned, leading to a dramatic increase in enforcement actions.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests at New York City immigration courthouses have surged, transforming what were once routine court appearances into experiences fraught with fear and uncertainty for immigrants and their families. The federal building at 26 Federal Plaza, which houses Manhattan’s largest immigration court, has become a focal point of this controversial enforcement surge. Here, ICE agents have routinely detained asylum seekers and other noncitizens as they arrive for their scheduled hearings.

The heightened enforcement has not gone unnoticed by the public. On June 10, 2025, several thousand protesters marched through lower Manhattan, demonstrating specifically against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests occurring during routine visits to 26 Federal Plaza. These demonstrations underscore the community's strong opposition to the agency's tactics in these sensitive legal environments. The consistent presence of ICE detentions at 26 Federal Plaza NYC has solidified its reputation as an epicenter for these controversial operations.

The aggressive enforcement by ICE at New York City courthouses has prompted significant judicial intervention. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan issued a class action injunction specifically addressing conditions and capacity within detention cells, aiming to regulate the environment where individuals are held post-arrest. Concurrently, Judge P. Kevin Castel delivered a separate, pivotal ruling that largely prohibited arrests within courthouses, seeking to restore the sanctity of judicial spaces for all attendees.

Despite these clear judicial directives, ICE has continued to carry out detentions, asserting that these actions fall under limited exceptions to the injunctions. This ongoing practice has fueled a persistent legal battle, raising fundamental questions about due process and the rule of law. The continued presence of ICE agents and their operations, even after a Judge Lewis Kaplan ICE injunction and a Judge P. Kevin Castel courthouse arrests ruling, highlights the complex and often contentious relationship between immigration enforcement and judicial authority.

The legal landscape surrounding Manhattan immigration court arrests remains fluid, with advocates and legal teams continually challenging the scope and interpretation of these exceptions. The persistence of ICE in conducting arrests within or immediately adjacent to court facilities, despite judicial efforts to curb such practices, means that the legal protections intended by the injunctions are not fully realized on the ground.

The sustained presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations at New York City immigration courts, particularly at 26 Federal Plaza, continues to have profound implications for noncitizens navigating the legal system. The transformation of court appearances into moments of profound fear and uncertainty directly undermines the ability of individuals to effectively pursue their legal rights and participate fully in mandatory proceedings. This environment creates a chilling effect, potentially deterring vulnerable individuals, such as asylum seekers, from attending hearings crucial to their cases.

When individuals face the risk of immediate detention upon entering a courthouse, the very foundation of a fair legal process is jeopardized. The ongoing legal dispute, characterized by ICE's reliance on "limited exceptions" to judicial injunctions, underscores a broader conflict regarding the principles of due process and the rule of law. This situation necessitates heightened vigilance from legal representatives, who must advise their clients of the continued risk of ICE arrests at 26 Federal Plaza NYC, even in the face of existing judicial protections.

Ultimately, the persistent enforcement actions by ICE, despite rulings designed to curtail courthouse arrests, perpetuate a climate of apprehension within the immigration legal system. The legal community remains engaged in challenging these practices, striving to ensure that all individuals can access justice without the looming threat of apprehension in spaces intended for legal recourse. The situation at 26 Federal Plaza serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle to balance immigration enforcement with fundamental legal protections.

Lawyers representing noncitizens in New York City immigration courts must advise clients of the continued risk of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests at courthouses, particularly 26 Federal Plaza, despite existing judicial injunctions. This ongoing enforcement surge necessitates heightened vigilance regarding client safety during court appearances and potential legal challenges against ICE's interpretation of exceptions to arrest bans.

Source: Original reporting via Courthouse News Service