U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb temporarily enjoined a DHS policy that would have required members of Congress to give seven days' notice before inspecting ICE detention facilities, finding the rule likely violated an appropriations provision protecting congressional oversight. The order followed a lawsuit from Democracy Forward Foundation and American Oversight on behalf of Democratic lawmakers. The ruling also paused the administration's position that some ICE field offices fall outside unfettered congressional inspection. The decision preserves lawmakers' ability to conduct inspections while the case moves forward.
Judge Temporarily Blocks DHS Rule Requiring 7-Day Notice Before Congressional Visits to ICE Facilities
A federal judge on Wednesday issued a temporary injunction against a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy that would have required members of Congress to provide at least seven days' advance notice before visiting and inspecting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities.
U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb found that the policy likely violated an appropriations provision enacted by Congress that prohibits DHS from using funds to require lawmakers to provide prior notice when conducting oversight inspections of facilities under DHS control.
The DHS policy, announced in June, directed members of Congress to submit inspection requests at least seven days before a planned visit and stated that only the Secretary of Homeland Security could waive that requirement. Before the policy change, ICE generally permitted visits by lawmakers without advance notice.
Contrary to Defendants' suggestion, then, the appropriations law does entitle Members of Congress to access ICE facilities without being subject to a notice requirement, Judge Jia Cobb wrote in her ruling.
The court action resulted from a lawsuit filed by Democracy Forward Foundation and American Oversight on behalf of about a dozen Democratic lawmakers who sought to inspect ICE detention sites. Plaintiffs argued that DHS had unlawfully blocked congressional oversight amid allegations of poor conditions in some facilities.
In a statement, Representative Dan Goldman of New York, one of the plaintiffs, said the ruling vindicated lawmakers' statutory right to conduct oversight, and called out what he described as efforts to prevent inspections of detention conditions.
The ruling also paused a separate position advanced by the administration that some ICE field offices should not be treated as detention centers subject to unfettered congressional inspection. Lawmakers contend that even short-term holding facilities and field offices must be inspectable because detainees are sometimes held there for extended periods.
Context and Detention Figures
The decision comes against the backdrop of a significant expansion of ICE detention in recent years. According to agency figures cited in the case, as of Nov. 30 roughly 66,000 people were being held in ICE custody nationwide — a reported high point. Those figures indicated that about 47% of detainees had no criminal records and were held on civil immigration violations, while approximately 26% had criminal convictions and another 26% had pending charges.
CBS News reached out to DHS for comment on the order. The agency's position had emphasized that requiring notice could protect enforcement operations and presidential authorities, while critics argued the policy would unduly restrict Congress's ability to conduct timely oversight.
The court's temporary injunction preserves lawmakers' access to inspect ICE facilities while the legal challenge proceeds.
