S.B. 1070 at the Supreme Court: What Will America Tolerate?

A new report from the ACLU and AFL-CIO outlines how mass deportations are damaging the economy. A broader path to citizenship would create jobs and raise wages.

NEW YORK – In a momentous victory for immigrants’ rights, today the Southern District of New York issued a final, landmark ruling in African Communities Together and The Door v. Todd Lyons striking down one of the Trump administration’s most extreme policies that allowed ICE agents to arrest people for showing up to immigration court. With this ruling, ICE officers cannot conduct civil immigration enforcement actions in or near immigration courthouses, except under limited circumstances, in New York City and across the nation. “Today’s ruling is an enormous win for every noncitizen seeking to safely attend their immigration court proceedings,” said Amy Belsher, director of Immigrants’ Rights Litigation at the New York Civil Liberties Union. “For too long, we watched masked, often armed, ICE officers ambush noncitizens in courthouse hallways, throw immigrants to the ground, and tear sobbing children from their parents. But with today’s order, the court made clear: ICE’s cruel, unjustified policy of conducting mass immigration arrests in courthouses is unlawful and cannot stand.” The court’s order found the government’s mass immigration court arrest policy “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act and restores pre-existing policies barring immigration courthouse arrests except in rare circumstances. Originally, the case also challenged a related 2025 Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) policy that urged immigration judges to dismiss noncitizens’ immigration proceedings without proper procedural protections. In this order, the court dismissed that claim as ‘moot,’ because the government had already fully and permanently rescinded it as result of an earlier order in this case. “People should not be arrested for doing exactly what the legal system requires of them,” said Oscar Sarabia Roman, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. "They should be able to come to court, take part in their cases, and leave without fear.” “Immigrant New Yorkers should not have to choose between attending a required immigration hearing and risking detention, or staying away and risking a deportation order for failing to appear,” said Katie Rosenfeld, partner at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. “This ruling restores important safeguards and makes clear that ICE cannot abandon those protections without a reasoned explanation. Due process requires a meaningful opportunity to be heard, and that means people must be able to come to court without fear.” “The court’s ruling is a monumental victory for immigrant families and the rule of law. It brings to an end the cruel and callous practice of arresting immigrants simply for showing up to their court hearings — something that no one should have to worry about, and yet so many were forced to live under that cloud of fear,” said Harold Solis, co-legal director at Make the Road New York. “Today marks a turning point, and our focus now shifts to doing everything in our power to ensure the government fully complies with the court’s decision.” The New York Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union, Make the Road NY, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel originally filed this lawsuit on behalf of African Communities Together and The Door on August 1, 2025. Soon after, the groups asked for expedited relief through a stay, which the court partly denied in September 2025. But then, in a shocking revelation in March, the government admitted that a 2025 memorandum — which it had relied on throughout the case to justify its immigration court arrest policy — does not and has never authorized any immigration courthouse arrests. Immediately after, the organizations asked the Court to reconsider its denial, and the court issued a stay. This final federal ruling affirms that order, and expands it to apply nationwide. It is effective immediately. Today’s ruling also builds on the resounding victory from the ACLU of Northern California, in Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, which similarly struck down the Trump administration’s policy of arresting immigrants at courthouses nationwide. Since Trump took office, ICE has mounted an unprecedented campaign of arresting people at their mandated immigration court hearings, and then trying to fast track their deportation. This includes Dylan, a 16-year-old Bronx high school who ICE arrested when attending a routine court date, and Oliver Mata Velazquez, a 19 year old living in Buffalo who ICE targeted, detained, and fast-tracked for deportation.    

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court today agreed to hear argument this term in Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, stemming from a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, New York Civil Liberties Union, and the Law Office of Paul Dwyer PC challenging the Trump administration’s new policy subjecting millions of immigrants to mandatory detention without access to bond hearings. In July 2025, the Trump administration suddenly adopted a new radical misinterpretation of immigration law, declaring that anyone who entered without inspection must be detained without access to bond or due process regardless of how long that person has lived in the country or their ties to family and community. Hundreds of federal district judges have ruled on thousands of related habeas petitions, with nine out of 10 judges ruling that the administration’s misinterpretation of immigration law is illegal. Nine federal appeals courts have also ruled against the policy, including a Second Circuit ruling at the center of this case. The following is reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case: “The courts have repeatedly and resoundingly rejected the Trump administration’s radical misinterpretation of the law. Try as it might, the government cannot twist the law to detain immigrants for months or even years on end without a bond hearing. Not only is it cruel and inhumane; it is unlawful. We look forward to making that case to the Supreme Court,” said Michael K.T. Tan, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “The Trump administration’s policy of detaining immigrants without any process is both inhumane and unlawful,” said Amy Belsher, director of Immigrants’ Rights Litigation at the New York Civil Liberties Union. “Despite their best efforts, the government cannot rewrite the law to detain millions of noncitizens, many of whom have lived here for decades, without an opportunity to seek release. The Immigration and Nationality Act, and fundamental fairness, require the government to, at a minimum, allow people to make a case for their release. We look forward to making that clear to the Supreme Court." “Mr. Barbosa da Cunha has been living in the U.S. for the last 22 years. He is a hard-working, small-business owner, with a U.S. citizen family and no criminal history. He has never missed an immigration appointment or hearing. Detaining him without the possibility of release on bond serves no purpose other than to punish him for being an immigrant, and has been solidly rejected by every court to have considered his case. We are confident that the Supreme Court will agree," said attorney Paul Dwyer of the Law Office of Paul Dwyer PC.  

The ACLU argued in court that Trump administration officials broke the law by defying a judge’s order and sending 100 Venezuelan men to a notoriously brutal prison in El Salvador without due process.