Immigrant groups sue to block ICE from withholding detainee locations
Permanent article number: 102826028 Find another article by number
Original article being examined
Published by: Just the News
Original reporting and source documents
Open the reporting and original documents used for this article. These include evidence sources; not every link is necessarily the original claim being examined.
Evidence and accountability
Archive transparency: this article has not yet completed the site's newer independent fact-audit process. Its source links are provided below. Do not treat allegations, commentary, or a rating as a legal finding.
Immigrant legal-services groups filed a lawsuit Wednesday seeking to stop the Trump administration from withholding the locations of detainees with final deportation orders. The case challenges a policy that, according to the lawsuit, makes it difficult or impossible for attorneys to find clients in ICE custody.
The reports say the policy was adopted last month to expedite deportations. Under the challenged change, ICE removed the locations of people with final removal orders from its Online Detainee Locator System and instructed staff not to disclose their whereabouts.
As of last month, the policy affected more than 16,000 of nearly 69,000 people held in ICE custody. The lawsuit argues that withholding locations interferes with lawyers’ ability to represent immigrants and asks a judge to block the change. The groups characterize the policy as unlawful and inhumane.
Neither ICE nor the Department of Homeland Security has publicly confirmed the change, the reports say. The agencies have said they are prioritizing people with final removal orders for deportation. The lawsuit seeks to block the policy, while the agencies’ public position on the specific locator change remains unconfirmed.
Comments
Read the discussion freely. Posting and voting require a verified member account. Every comment and reply is screened by AI before publication. Clear spam and abuse are blocked; only strongly cleared comments publish automatically, while uncertain drafts wait for moderator review. Civil factual disagreement alone is not grounds for rejection.
Log in to comment or join free to take part.
No comments yet. Be the first reasonably on-topic person here.