Within the past month, a wave of immigration enforcement activity at courthouses across the United States has sparked renewed criticism and legal disputes, echoing President Donald Trump’s initial term of office when similar tactics faced backlash. In Virginia, three plainclothes immigration agents detained a man immediately after misdemeanor assault charges against him were dismissed. They refused to present identification or a warrant and even threatened to prosecute bystanders who attempted to intervene, as depicted in cellphone footage of the incident.
In another instance, reported by North Carolina media, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) acknowledged the apprehension of four individuals at a local courthouse, stirring concerns from the county sheriff about inadequate agency communication and disruption of court activities. Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, agents tackled a Venezuelan man near a courthouse elevator, unintentionally knocking over an elderly man with a cane.
Boston witnessed an ICE detention during a trial, which led to a municipal court judge holding the agent in contempt — a decision later reversed by a federal judge. The intensifying presence of immigration enforcement in these venues has raised alarms among judicial figures and attorneys, fearing that individuals might avoid attending court due to these tactics.
The issue gained further prominence following the recent arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan in Wisconsin. She was taken into custody by the FBI, accused of attempting to aid a defendant’s escape from federal agents by providing an alternate courtroom exit. Attorney General Pam Bondi commented on the matter, affirming that some judges wrongly assume themselves above the law and applauding the arrest’s strong message.
Historically, ICE did not arrest individuals at sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals, courthouses, and places of worship. However, the Trump administration altered this approach, allowing targeted arrests at courthouses. This policy change particularly affected “sanctuary” jurisdictions where local authorities had stopped informing ICE about releasing immigrants involved in deportation cases.
During this period, courthouse arrests drew widespread condemnation and led to various states introducing legislation to counter the practice. There are parallels between Judge Dugan’s case and earlier cases from Trump’s first term, notably a Massachusetts judge accused of aiding a suspect’s escape and an Oregon judge facing similar accusations although not formally charged.
As Biden’s administration initially restricted such enforcement, these regulations were quickly rescinded following Trump’s return to office this year. As per ICE guidelines from January 21, agents are permitted to conduct operations at or near courthouses if they suspect the presence of a target. Agents are advised to minimize public disruptions and coordinate with courthouse security while executing these arrests.
One particular case catching attention occurred in a Charlottesville courtroom on April 22 when ICE agents arrested Teodoro Dominguez Rodriguez, a Honduran national, following his court appearance. The officers, one donning a ski mask, disregarded demands from observers to exhibit badges or warrants, according to video recordings.
Albemarle County Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Hingeley criticized the agents for not adequately identifying themselves during the arrest. Concerned by potential violent resistance given the arrest’s appearance as unlawful, he expressed his disapproval. The ICE, in a statement, backed the agents, citing their training to ensure effective and safe operations.
Public defender Nick Reppucci, who documented the arrest, stressed the adverse impacts such actions might have on individuals’ willingness to appear in court, traditionally viewed as a place for peaceful conflict resolution. He noted that courthouse apprehensions could discourage people involved in various legal proceedings from attending court.