卡米洛·蒙托亚-加尔维斯，
卡米洛·蒙托亚-加尔维斯 移民记者
卡米洛·蒙托亚-加尔维斯是哥伦比亚广播公司新闻（CBS News）的移民记者，其报道在多个节目和平台上播出，包括全国性广播节目、CBS新闻24/7频道、CBSNews.com以及该机构的社交媒体账号。
[阅读完整简历]
卡米洛·蒙托亚-加尔维斯，
雅各布·罗森
雅各布·罗森 司法部记者
雅各布·罗森是报道美国司法部的记者。他此前曾担任报道特朗普总统2024年竞选活动的竞选数字记者，并担任《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》（Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan）的助理制片人。
[阅读完整简历]
雅各布·罗森
更新时间：2026年3月26日 / 美国东部时间上午11:14 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
美国司法部本周向纽约联邦法官承认，其错误引用了美国移民与海关执法局（ICE）的一份备忘录，以部分证明对移民法庭内逮捕行为的合法性，称此次失误是“对事实的重大错误陈述”。
司法部律师在周二的一封信中披露，2025年5月的ICE备忘录适用于大多数法院，但不适用于联邦移民法庭。过去一年中，人们看到特工在联邦移民法庭逮捕了前来参加听证会的人员。
政府律师向美国联邦地区法院法官凯文·卡斯特尔（Kevin Castel）表示，由于一名“机构律师”（据推测是ICE的律师）的“遗憾性错误”，他们在数月的诉讼中错误引用了该备忘录，以质疑法院对移民法庭逮捕行为的合法性。
司法部律师在信中称：“我们深感遗憾的是，在各方已投入大量资源和时间进行诉讼，且法院已仔细考虑原告对2025年ICE指南的质疑之后，这一错误才被发现。”
这封信提交给了一起联邦法院案件，该案件源于倡导组织对ICE在移民法庭内实施逮捕的做法提起的诉讼。移民法庭由司法部管理，特朗普总统对非法移民的打击行动中，逮捕行为引发了倡导者的批评，他们表示这惩罚了那些遵守移民程序、前来参加听证会的人。
去年9月，卡斯特尔法官在很大程度上驳回了原告对移民法庭逮捕行为的质疑动议。
尽管司法部律师在信中承认，卡斯特尔法官在去年的裁决中部分依赖了2025年5月的ICE备忘录，但他们表示，这一错误不影响他们支持移民法庭逮捕合法性的其他论点。
负责监督ICE的美国国土安全部（Department of Homeland Security）在周四的一份声明中表示：“政策没有改变。”
该部门补充道：“我们将继续在移民法庭程序结束后逮捕非法移民。在驱逐程序完成后将其拘留是常识，在发现违法者的地方逮捕他们并无任何禁令。”
卡斯特尔法官尚未正式回应司法部的承认。
代表倡导组织对ICE在移民法庭内逮捕行为提起诉讼的纽约公民自由联盟表示，联邦政府的承认“具有深远影响”。
该组织在周三致卡斯特尔的另一封信中称：“自法院依赖政府的陈述驳回原告初步救济以来的几个月里，被告继续在移民法庭听证会上逮捕非公民，导致他们被拘留——通常被关押在数百英里外的设施中。”
自特朗普政府开始以来，美国各地的移民法庭内都出现了逮捕行为。便衣联邦特工与国土安全部协调行动，在寻求庇护者和移民前往移民法庭参加例行听证会时，在法庭走廊进行逮捕。
通常情况下，法官会批准政府的请求，驳回对移民的驱逐程序，而ICE官员则在附近等候，准备将其拘留。一旦被拘留，他们将进入快速驱逐程序。
根据去年哥伦比亚广播公司新闻的分析，曼哈顿移民法庭的逮捕次数在美国主要城市中最多。
移民法庭成立于1952年，由司法部控制的移民审查执行办公室（EOIR）管理，允许司法部长推翻法官的决定，并雇佣或解雇法官。
截至去年12月，自特朗普政府执政以来，全国已有约100名移民法官被解雇，同期还有几乎同样数量的法官选择提前离职、退休或辞职。
Justice Department tells judge it incorrectly used ICE memo to justify immigration court arrests
Camilo Montoya-Galvez,
Camilo Montoya-Galvez Immigration Correspondent
Camilo Montoya-Galvez is the Immigration Correspondent at CBS News, where his reporting is featured across multiple programs and platforms, including national broadcast shows, CBS News 24/7, CBSNews.com and the organization’s social media accounts.
[Read Full Bio]
Camilo Montoya-Galvez,
Jacob Rosen
Jacob Rosen Justice Department Reporter
Jake Rosen is a reporter covering the Department of Justice. He was previously a campaign digital reporter covering President Trump’s 2024 campaign and also served as an associate producer for “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
[Read Full Bio]
Jacob Rosen
Updated on: March 26, 2026 / 11:14 AM EDT / CBS News
The Justice Department this week conceded to a federal judge in New York it had been incorrectly citing an Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo to partially justify arrests at immigration courthouses, calling the oversight a “material mistaken statement of fact.”
Justice Department lawyers disclosed in a letter on Tuesday that a May 2025 ICE memo applies to most courthouses, but not federal immigration courts, where agents have been seen over the past year making arrests of those attending their hearings.
The government attorneys told U.S. District Court Judge Kevin Castel that they erroneously cited the memo in monthslong litigation challenging the courthouse arrests because of a “regrettable error” by an “agency attorney,” presumably at ICE.
“We deeply regret that this error has come to light at this late stage, after the parties have expended significant resources and time to litigate this case and this Court has carefully considered Plaintiffs’ challenge to the 2025 ICE Guidance,” the Justice Department lawyers said in their letter.
The letter was submitted in a federal court case stemming from a lawsuit by advocacy groups challenging ICE’s practice of carrying out arrests inside immigration courts, which are run by the Justice Department. The arrests, part of President Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration, have elicited criticism from advocates who say they punish those attempting to comply with the immigration process by attending their hearings.
In September, Castel largely denied a motion from the groups challenging the courthouse arrests.
While they acknowledged that Castel relied in part on the May 2025 ICE memo in his ruling last year, the Justice Department lawyers said in their letter that the error does not affect their other arguments in support of the legality of the immigration court arrests.
In a statement Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, said, “There is no change in policy.”
“We will continue to arrest illegal aliens at immigration courts following their proceedings,” the department added. “It is common sense to take them into custody following the completion of their removal proceedings. Nothing prohibits arresting a lawbreaker where you find them.”
Castel has not yet formally responded to the Justice Department’s admission.
The New York Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit against ICE’s courthouse arrests on behalf of the advocacy groups, said the federal government’s admission had “far-reaching” consequences.
“In the months since the Court relied on the government’s representation to deny Plaintiffs preliminary relief, Defendants have continued arresting noncitizens at their immigration court hearings, resulting in their detention—often in facilities hundreds of miles away,” the organization said in its own letter to Castel on Wednesday.
Arrests at immigration courthouses played out across the U.S. since the beginning of the Trump administration, as plainclothes federal agents carried out arrests in courthouse hallways in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security when asylum-seekers and immigrants went to the buildings for routine hearings.
Typically, a judge would grant the government’s request to dismiss deportation proceedings against an immigrant while ICE officers wait nearby in the building to take them into custody. Once they are detained, they are moved to an expedited removal process.
According to a CBS News analysis last year, Manhattan’s immigration courts saw the most arrests of any major city in America.
The immigration courts were established in 1952, and operate under the Executive Office for Immigration Review, or EOIR, which the Justice Department controls, allowing the Attorney General to override judges decisions and hire or fire judges.
As of December, about 100 immigration judges have been fired nationally since the start of the Trump administration, and almost an equal number have taken early out options, retired, or resigned in the same time period.