2026年6月24日 美国东部时间下午2:09 / 福克斯新闻频道
美国国土安全部总法律顾问称该裁决是为“开放边境议程”服务的“赤裸裸的司法激进主义”
作者：伊莱恩·马伦 福克斯新闻
特朗普总统宣布与伊朗达成潜在协议，近期敌对事件后或取消军事打击。犹他州两名前法院书记员因协助非法移民躲避移民海关执法局（ICE）面临重罪指控。美国司法部还披露有42.5万名无人陪伴未成年人失踪，其中一些遭犯罪分子利用，导致儿童走私逮捕行动展开。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻文章！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/aeb06f23-fa99-4f79-80c8-66791f4ec975
收听本文
5 分钟
一位曾多次阻止特朗普政府移民政策的联邦法官周二再次给予重击，推翻了扩大法院逮捕范围并延长移民海关执法局（ICE）羁押设施拘留期限的规则。
在一份长达71页的判决书中，由前总统乔·拜登提名的美国地区法官P·凯西·皮茨裁定，ICE和司法部移民审查执行办公室（EOIR）未提供《行政程序法》要求的合理解释，因此废止相关政策。
这一裁决延续了皮茨干预特朗普政府移民政策的一贯做法。今年早些时候，他曾阻止ICE一项允许该机构重新逮捕此前已释放移民的举措。在另一起案件中，他以过度拥挤和可能违反宪法标准的条件为由，下令对旧金山ICE拘留设施进行全面整改。
拜登任命的法官在关键特朗普移民政策上作出推翻裁决
2025年6月27日，纽约联邦广场法院内，移民海关执法局特工在实施逮捕前核对姓名名单和庭审时间。（布莱恩·R·史密斯/法新社）
尽管皮茨的命令适用于全美，但这与最高法院2025年在“特朗普诉CASA案”中认定违宪的广泛全国禁令不同。皮茨并未发布禁止政府执行该政策的禁令，而是根据《行政程序法》直接废止了这些政策。当法院废止一项政策时，它会彻底移除该政策本身，而非仅限制其执行方式。
皮茨的裁决是针对一群寻求庇护者提起的诉讼作出的，该诉讼挑战ICE2025年政策，该政策取消了对包括移民法院在内的法院内民事移民逮捕的限制，同时另一项ICE政策允许被拘留者在短期羁押设施中最多关押72小时，而非该机构长期以来的12小时限制。
法官认定ICE未充分解释为何放弃此前限制法院逮捕的指导方针，此前的指导方针担忧法院逮捕可能会阻止移民出庭参加听证会，并干扰司法程序。
“正如本院此前详述的那样，这些政策完全没有解决法院逮捕对非公民出席法庭程序的寒蝉效应，这既是ICE2021年指导方针背后的关键因素，本身也是‘问题的重要方面’，”皮茨写道。
联邦法官限制无需搜查令、合理依据的ICE逮捕
2026年6月26日，纽约市联邦广场法院内，数十名移民在法律程序结束后被ICE特工拘留。（洛克曼·武拉尔·埃利博尔/阿纳多卢通讯社）
皮茨特别批评了政府对移民法院逮捕行动的处理方式。根据判决，政府花了数月时间为该政策辩护称其适用于移民法院，后来却披露ICE内部实际上认为该政策根本不适用于移民法院。
“从ICE2025年法院逮捕政策的表面内容或行政记录来看，没有任何迹象表明ICE意识到自己在没有任何替代指导方针的情况下，取消了移民法院内民事执法活动的所有先前限制，”皮茨写道。
他最终得出结论，该机构几乎没有为这一变更提供任何解释。
“ICE2025年的法院逮捕政策对该机构的选择毫无合理依据（甚至未予以承认），”这位法官写道。
皮茨还废止了EOIR一项相关政策，该政策取消了对移民法院内移民执法活动的限制。法官认定该机构依赖有缺陷的假设，未正视法院逮捕可能会阻止移民出席庭审的证据。
法官还单独推翻了ICE对其12小时拘留期限限制的全国性豁免。该豁免是在ICE报告称执法活动增加导致羁押能力紧张、转移至长期羁押设施的工作复杂化后通过的。
联邦法官裁定艾奥瓦州ICE非法拘留男子并试图“掩盖痕迹”
皮茨发现该机构未考虑替代方案，未将该政策与其自身羁押标准相协调，也未充分说明延长被拘留者在羁押设施中的关押时间是否会造成违宪条件。
“在宣布12小时拘留豁免的备忘录或行政记录中，没有任何内容表明ICE曾理性考虑过其避免造成惩罚性监禁条件的义务，”他写道。
2026年6月18日，唐纳德·特朗普总统在华盛顿特区白宫东厅的荣誉勋章仪式上发表讲话。该仪式向88岁的越南退伍军人卡珀斯、海军陆战队上校约翰·W·里普利（追授）以及退役陆军少校尼古拉斯·多克里颁发勋章。（阿尔·德拉格/盖蒂图片社）
在整个判决意见中，皮茨强调，如果政府遵守联邦法律规定的程序要求，仍可以推行更严格的移民执法政策。
“一个机构不得……悄无声息地偏离先前的政策，”皮茨援引最高法院先例写道。
此前一个月，纽约美国地区法官P·凯文·卡斯特尔作出类似裁决，在另一项挑战仍在审理期间，基本禁止ICE在曼哈顿三座移民法院内或附近进行民事移民逮捕。
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
美国国土安全部严厉批评了皮茨的裁决。
“当法官判决被告时，被告会被羁押。如果一名外籍人士被移民法官下令递解出境，也理应如此。一名地区法官作出相反裁决，是为反美、开放边境议程服务的赤裸裸的司法激进主义，”国土安全部总法律顾问詹姆斯·珀西瓦尔在一份声明中说道。
伊莱恩·马伦是福克斯新闻数字频道和福克斯商业频道的撰稿人，报道全国政治新闻。
Biden judge torches Trump ICE crackdown as ‘devoid of rational explanation,’ nukes courthouse arrest policy
June 24, 2026 2:09pm EDT / Fox News
DHS general counsel called the ruling ‘naked judicial activism’ in service of an ‘open borders agenda’
By Elaine Mallon, Fox News
A potential deal with Iran is announced by President Trump, possibly canceling military strikes after recent hostilities. Two former Utah court clerks face felony charges for aiding illegal immigrants in evading ICE. The Justice Department also highlights 425,000 missing unaccompanied minors, with some exploited by criminals, leading to child smuggling arrests.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/aeb06f23-fa99-4f79-80c8-66791f4ec975
Listen to this article
5 min
A federal judge who has repeatedly blocked the Trump administration’s immigration policies dealt another blow Tuesday, striking down rules that expanded courthouse arrests and prolonged detention in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) holding facilities.
In a 71-page decision, U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts, who was nominated by former President Joe Biden, struck down the policies after finding that ICE and the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) did not provide the reasoned explanation required under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The ruling continues a pattern of Pitts intervening against Trump administration immigration policies. Earlier this year, he blocked an ICE initiative that would have allowed the agency to rearrest migrants it had previously released. In another case, he ordered sweeping changes at a San Francisco ICE detention facility, citing overcrowding and conditions he found likely violated constitutional standards.
BIDEN JUDGE OVERRULED ON KEY TRUMP IMMIGRATION POLICY
ICE agents review lists of names and hearing times inside the Federal Plaza courthouse before making arrests in New York on June 27, 2025.(Bryan R. Smith/AFP)
While Pitts’ order applies nationwide, it differs from the broad nationwide injunctions that the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional in its 2025 decision in Trump v. CASA. Rather than issuing an injunction prohibiting the government from enforcing the policies, Pitts vacated them under the Administrative Procedure Act. When a court vacates a policy, it removes the policy itself rather than just limiting how it can be enforced.
Pitts’ ruling comes in response to a lawsuit filed by a group of asylum seekers challenging ICE’s 2025 policies that removed restrictions on civil immigration arrests at courthouses, including immigration courts, and a separate ICE policy allowing detainees to remain in short-term holding facilities for up to 72 hours instead of the agency’s longstanding 12-hour limit.
The judge found ICE failed to adequately explain why it abandoned prior guidance that limited courthouse arrests because of concerns they could discourage immigrants from appearing for hearings and interfere with the administration of justice.
“As the Court has previously detailed, the policies entirely fail to address the chilling effect of courthouse arrests on noncitizens’ attendance at court proceedings, which is both a critical factor underlying ICE’s 2021 guidance and an ‘important aspect of the problem’ in its own right,” Pitts wrote.
FEDERAL JUDGE LIMITS ICE ARRESTS WITHOUT WARRANT, PROBABLE CAUSE
Dozens of immigrants are detained by ICE agents inside the Federal Plaza courthouse in New York City following their legal proceedings on June 26.(Lokman Vural Elibol/Anadolu)
Pitts was particularly critical of the government’s handling of arrests at immigration courthouses. According to the ruling, the administration spent months defending the policy as applicable to immigration courts before later disclosing that ICE internally viewed the policy as not applying there at all.
“Nothing on the face of ICE’s 2025 courthouse-arrest policies or in the administrative record suggests that ICE recognized it was removing all prior limitations on civil enforcement activities at immigration courthouses without any substitute guidance,” Pitts wrote.
He ultimately concluded that the agency offered virtually no explanation for the change.
“ICE’s 2025 courthouse-arrest policies are devoid of rational explanation for (or even acknowledgement of) the agency’s choices,” the judge wrote.
Pitts also vacated a related EOIR policy rescinding restrictions on immigration enforcement activity at immigration courthouses. The judge found the agency relied on flawed assumptions and failed to grapple with evidence that courthouse arrests could discourage immigrants from attending proceedings.
The judge separately struck down ICE’s nationwide waiver of its 12-hour detention limit. The waiver was adopted after ICE reported that increased enforcement activity had strained detention capacity and complicated transfers to longer-term facilities.
FEDERAL JUDGE RULES ICE IN IOWA ILLEGALLY DETAINED MAN, TRIED TO ‘COVER ITS TRACKS’
Pitts found the agency failed to consider alternatives, reconcile the policy with its own detention standards or adequately address whether keeping detainees in holding facilities for extended periods could create unconstitutional conditions.
“Nothing in the memorandum announcing the 12-hour-detention waiver or in the administrative record suggests that ICE engaged in reasoned consideration of its obligation to avoid creating punitive conditions of confinement,” he wrote.
President Donald Trump speaks during a Medal of Honor Ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 18, 2026. The ceremony honors Capers, an 88-year-old Vietnam veteran, along with Colonel John W. Ripley, U.S. Marine Corps (posthumous), and Major Nicholas Dockery, U.S. Army (retired).(Al Drago/Getty Images)
Throughout the opinion, Pitts emphasized that the administration remained free to pursue tougher immigration enforcement policies if it followed the procedural requirements imposed by federal law.
“An agency may not … depart from a prior policy sub silentio,” Pitts wrote, citing Supreme Court precedent.
The ruling follows a similar decision last month by U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel in New York, who largely barred ICE from conducting civil immigration arrests at or near three Manhattan immigration courthouses while a separate challenge proceeds.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The Department of Homeland Security sharply criticized Pitts’ ruling.
“When a judge sentences a defendant, the defendant is taken into custody. If an alien is ordered removed by an immigration judge, the same should happen. A district judge ordering otherwise is naked judicial activism in service of an anti-American, open borders agenda,” DHS General Counsel James Percival said in a statement.
Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.
发表回复