U.S. immigration agents in Oregon must stop arresting people without warrants unless there is a likelihood of escape, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, issuing a preliminary injunction tied to a proposed class-action challenging how the federal government conducts immigration enforcement. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai restricts the Department of Homeland Security’s practices during ramped-up enforcement operations in the state.
Kasubhai issued the injunction in the case, which targets what critics describe as arrests that occur before legal justification is worked through. The lawsuit names the department as a defendant and seeks class-action relief over arrests made when officers encounter people while conducting enforcement operations.
The judge’s order centers on warrant requirements, and it directs that agents may not make warrantless arrests in Oregon unless authorities can establish a likelihood of escape. The Associated Press reported that the department did not immediately comment after being asked for a response to the ruling.
In testimony and evidence considered during a daylong hearing, Kasubhai heard accounts meant to show that agents in Oregon had arrested people during sweeps without the warrant and without determining that escape was likely. The decision came even as the government emphasized what it says agents should do.
The Associated Press reported that in a memo issued last week, Todd Lyons, the acting head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, emphasized that agents should not arrest someone without an administrative arrest warrant issued by a supervisor unless they develop probable cause to believe the person is in the U.S. illegally and likely to escape from the scene before a warrant can be obtained. Still, Kasubhai heard evidence that agents had proceeded without that approach in at least some cases in Oregon.
One plaintiff, Victor Cruz Gamez, testified during the hearing that he was arrested and held in an immigration detention facility for three weeks even though he said he had a valid work permit and a pending visa application. Cruz Gamez told the court that in October he was driving home from work when immigration agents pulled him over, detained him after showing his driver’s license and work permit, and took him to the ICE building in Portland before sending him to a detention center in Tacoma, Washington.
Cruz Gamez told the court that after the three weeks he was set to be deported until a lawyer secured his release. The Associated Press reported that he recounted how the arrest affected his family, including his wife, and said that after he returned home they did not open the door for three weeks out of fear and that one of his grandchildren did not want to go to school.
After Cruz Gamez’s account, the AP reported that a lawyer for the federal government told him he was sorry for what he went through and for its effect on his family. Kasubhai, in turn, characterized the conduct he heard about as a due-process problem, saying the actions of agents in Oregon—including drawing guns on people while detaining them for civil immigration violations—have been “violent and brutal,” and warning that the administration is denying due process to those swept up in immigration raids.
“Due process calls for those who have great power to exercise great restraint,” Kasubhai said. “That is the bedrock of a democratic republic founded on this great constitution. I think we’re losing that.” The injunction is set to remain in effect while the lawsuit proceeds.
The lawsuit was brought by Innovation Law Lab, according to the AP, and its executive director, Stephen Manning, told the court during the hearing that he was confident the case would be a “catalyst for change here in Oregon.” Manning said the litigation is about asking the government to follow the law.
The AP reported that similar legal challenges to warrantless immigration arrests have been brought in other places, including Colorado and Washington, D.C., and that the government has appealed rulings there. In Oregon, the preliminary injunction means the restraint on warrantless arrests will apply as the case moves forward.