A federal judge Monday refused to block a Department of Homeland Security policy requiring members of Congress to provide a week’s notice before visiting Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities. The decision came after three Democratic representatives from Minnesota — Ilhan Omar, Kelly Morrison and Angie Craig — were turned away from an ICE facility near Minneapolis early this month, three days after an ICE officer shot and killed U.S. citizen Renee Good in the city.

The dispute centers on congressional oversight authority during the administration’s intensified immigration enforcement operations, with lawmakers contending that advance-notice requirements prevent them from observing actual detention conditions.

The Ruling

U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb in Washington rejected a request from Democratic representatives and their legal team to block the new DHS policy. “The Court emphasizes that it denies Plaintiffs’ motion only because it is not the proper avenue to challenge Defendants’ January 8, 2026 memorandum and the policy stated therein, rather than based on any kind of finding that the policy is lawful,” she wrote in her decision.

The judge stressed she was not ruling on whether the policy itself is legal—only that the plaintiffs had used the wrong procedural mechanism to challenge it. She concluded that the new DHS memorandum, signed by Secretary Kristi Noem on January 8, constitutes distinct agency action not covered by her prior order.

The Blocked Visit and Its Context

The three Minnesota representatives sought access without providing advance notice, which Congress had previously been able to do. After they were denied entry, their legal team learned that DHS had secretly signed a new memorandum reinstating a seven-day notice requirement.

Democracy Forward lawyers said DHS did not disclose the new policy until after the representatives’ visit attempt.

Prior Court Order

In December, Judge Cobb temporarily blocked the seven-day notice requirement, ruling on December 17 that it was likely illegal for ICE to demand advance notice from members of Congress seeking to visit and observe detention facilities.

She noted at that time that “the changing conditions within ICE facilities means that it is likely impossible for a Member of Congress to reconstruct the conditions at a facility on the day that they initially sought to enter.”

DHS’s January 8 memorandum essentially revived the restriction the December order sought to prevent. But Judge Cobb found the new policy fell outside her prior ruling’s scope, requiring a fresh legal challenge.

Twelve other Democratic members of Congress sued in Washington to challenge amended ICE visitor policies after being denied entry to detention facilities. Their lawsuit accuses the Trump administration of obstructing congressional oversight.

Federal law prohibits using appropriated funds to block congressional oversight visits. Plaintiffs’ attorneys argued the administration hasn’t shown that no such funds are being used to implement the notice requirement.

“Appropriations are not a game. They are a law,” said Christine Coogle, a plaintiffs’ attorney, during oral arguments.

Justice Department attorney Amber Richer countered that the January 8 policy is distinct from previous policies. “This is really a challenge to a new policy,” she said.

Congressional Response and Next Steps

Melissa Schwartz, spokeswoman for Democracy Forward, said the organization was reviewing the judge’s ruling.

“We will continue to use every legal tool available to stop the administration’s efforts to hide from congressional oversight,” Schwartz said in a statement.

The timing carries added weight: DHS’s annual appropriations are due to expire January 30. Lawmakers negotiating the funding for DHS and ICE for the next fiscal year argue that unannounced visits are essential to obtaining accurate information about detention conditions.

Government attorneys have previously argued that conditions in ICE facilities are stable enough that representatives can assess them adequately even with a week’s notice. Judge Cobb rejected this reasoning in her December order, finding that facility conditions can change significantly over the course of seven days.