A federal judge determined that U.S. Marshals lack the necessary legal authority and training to arrest or detain criminal defendants in Washington, D.C.’s court system for suspected civil immigration violations. This ruling marks a setback for the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement efforts.
Case Background
The case centers on an individual known as N.S., detained by U.S. Marshals in January 2020 after a D.C. judge ordered his release. Marshals held N.S. on an ICE detainer until immigration officials took over. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth stated in a 21-page opinion that Marshals detained him without the required training or authority.
The lawsuit evolved into a class action challenging this detention practice. In 2021, a federal court initially barred the practice, but this injunction was vacated following a Supreme Court ruling that limited classwide injunctions in certain immigration cases. The appeals court affirmed that Marshals lacked the authority in this case and sent it back to the district court.
Appeals Court’s Findings and Context
The appeals court agreed that Marshals needed specific training, outlined in federal immigration regulations, to justify their actions concerning N.S. This case reflects broader aspects of the Trump administration’s immigration strategy, where multiple federal agencies support ICE in extensive operations.
During early July, ICE averaged 1,474 arrests per day, an increase from June figures. The detainee population reached 65,765, nearing a record level set earlier in 2020.
Government’s Argument and Rejection
On remand, the government claimed the case was moot, pointing out Marshals’ later training and a January 2025 order by then-acting Homeland Security Secretary Benjamin C. Huffman that seemingly authorized new immigration-enforcement activities. However, Judge Lamberth rejected this view.
He determined that the 2025 order did not legally expand Marshals’ authority, as DHS cannot amend federal regulations through internal memoranda without adhering to the required public rulemaking process.
Court’s Conclusions
The court emphasized that the Marshals lacked the training mandated by regulations. Virtual lessons provided by ICE attorneys did not meet the substantial equivalency of formal courses.
Lamberth denied the government’s dismissal motion, declaring that U.S. Marshals do not have the legal authority or training to detain for suspected civil immigration violations within D.C.’s Superior Court.
This case magnifies ongoing scrutiny over federal agents’ training and use of force amid deadly immigration enforcement incidents, such as the January deaths in Minnesota and the fatal Texas shooting in July.
For comments, Newsweek editors John Fitzpatrick and Dave Siminoff can be contacted.
Leave a Reply