Federal judges in Oregon, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania made rulings on Wednesday that limited or reversed actions by ICE. They raised issues such as unlawful civil arrests and detention choices that didn’t follow the law.
In Oregon, U.S. District Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai issued a preliminary injunction. This order prevents federal immigration officers from carrying out warrantless civil immigration arrests unless they first assess that a person is likely to flee before obtaining a warrant.
Kasubhai noted that there was “ample evidence” of a state practice of making warrantless arrests without evaluating flight risk on a case-by-case basis. The order provisionally certified a class of people who were arrested in Oregon without warrants and individual assessments on flight risk since September 2025. It also required more documentation for future warrantless arrests, according to Newsweek’s summary.
In Minnesota, U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson directed immigration officials to free a long-time U.S. resident. She found that the government did not have lawful authority to detain him based on its explanation. The court papers described the individual as a Mexican citizen who has lived in the U.S. since 1988.
He resides in St. Paul and cares for his 87-year-old father while awaiting a decision on his green card application. The petition stated that ICE agents in masks arrested him without a warrant on January 4, 2026, while he was leaving a family member’s home with his father, and then detained him at the Freeborn County Jail.
Nelson dismissed the government’s claim that a recent interpretation from the Department of Homeland Security required mandatory detention. Instead, she ordered his release and the return of his personal and immigration documents, noting limits on re-detention unless significant changes occurred.
In Pennsylvania, U.S. District Judge Harvey Bartle III approved a habeas corpus petition from Guilherme Coelho Lopes, a Brazilian asylum seeker who was detained at the Federal Detention Center in Philadelphia after ICE took him into custody during a routine appointment. Bartle stated that “Despite hundreds of similar rulings in this and other courts that favor ICE-detainee petitioners, ICE continues to act contrary to law, wasting taxpayer money and the limited resources of the judiciary.”
Newsweek reported that Bartle rejected ICE’s assertion that Lopes was subject to mandatory detention under a policy that defined certain noncitizens already living in the U.S. as “applicants for admission,” which could restrict bond eligibility. The filings explained that Lopes entered the U.S. in late 2023 with his wife and two children, living in Philadelphia while seeking asylum, and there was no criminal record mentioned in the petition.
These three orders came as the Trump administration intensified immigration enforcement across the nation and dealt with a rising volume of lawsuits regarding arrests and detention authority, with more plaintiffs seeking emergency relief in federal court through class claims and habeas petitions.
After two high-profile killings of two American citizens, ICE has faced reputational damage different from its past controversies, as the tragedies have inspired bigger anti-ICE protests across the nation and internationally.
