In a sweeping legal challenge to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement regime, a coalition of civil rights organizations filed two motions for summary judgment seeking to vacate and block some of the administration’s most extreme policies on a nationwide scale. The motions, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, seek to vacate (1) ICE’s waiver of the 12-hour limit on detention in temporary holding cells, and (2) ICE and the Executive Office for Immigration Review’s (EOIR) courthouse arrest policies, which target immigrants at immigration courts. If granted, the rulings would apply nationwide, ending both the policy permitting extended detention in ill-equipped short-term facilities and the policies permitting mass arrests of immigrants while they attend court.The motions arise from the ongoing federal class action lawsuit Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, challenging the Trump administration’s policy of courthouse arrests and the prolonged detention of immigrants in unsafe and unlawful conditions at short-term holding facilities. The motion to vacate the courthouse arrest policies challenges Trump administration policies that have forced immigrants to choose between attending mandatory hearings and risking arrest or skipping court and facing automatic deportation. The policies have led to a sharp increase in absenteeism, undermining the integrity of the immigration court system. The motion argues that the policies violate the Administrative Procedure Act, as they reverse a longstanding practice without a reasoned explanation and fail to consider the severe chilling effect on access to justice.On December 24, 2025, Judge Casey Pitts issued a ruling staying for the pendency of the lawsuit the ICE and EOIR courthouse arrest policies in ICE’s San Francisco Area of Responsibility, which includes Northern and Central California, based on a finding that the policies likely violate the Administrative Procedure Act.The motion to vacate ICE’s “Nationwide Hold Room Waiver” challenges a policy ICE issued in June 2025 which extended the limit on detention in temporary holding facilities from 12 hours to 72 hours. The motion argues that ICE failed to consider alternatives and disregarded the humanitarian and constitutional consequences of detaining people overnight or for days in barebones cells designed for short-term use. Both motions seek full vacatur of the policies nationwide. If successful, they would restore the 12-hour limit for ICE holding facilities across the country, restrain ICE from making civil arrests at immigration courthouses nationwide, and reinforce the principle that federal agencies must provide reasoned justifications for abrupt policy changes, especially when those changes endanger human rights and access to due process.The plaintiffs are represented by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area (LCCRSF), the Central American Resource Center of Northern California (CARECEN SF), the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Northern California (ACLU NorCal), and Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP.View the motions here and here. Attorney Quotes: "The Trump administration’s arbitrary policies are an assault on due process. Transforming immigration courthouses into sites of arrest eviscerates the right to access justice while prolonging detention in barren cells violates the Fifth Amendment's core promise against punishment without trial. Our fight is to restore the foundational principle that the government cannot detain people in inhumane conditions or terrorize them out of court," said Nisha Kashyap, Program Director at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area.“The administration’s reckless courthouse arrest policy is an affront to justice, designed to sabotage the immigration court system and force people to abandon their lawful claims,” said Jordan Wells, Program Director at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area. “This is a critical step in ensuring that immigrants can safely pursue their immigration cases without fear of arrest.”“From arrest to detention, the Trump administration’s policies are a symptom of a lawless approach to governance. One policy creates fear of the system, and the other inflicts suffering within it, creating a cycle of trauma.We are fighting to break this cycle by ending both the courthouse arrests and the prolonged, brutal detentions they feed,” said Neil Sawhney, Director of Appellate Advocacy at ACLU of Northern California.“These policies are a direct attack on the safety and dignity of our families. They force parents to choose between appearing in court to fight for their right to stay with their children, or missing that hearing to avoid being snatched away by masked agents. We hear the trauma in our community's voices every day. This legal action is our collective cry for justice. We ask the court to uphold the rule of law and restore human dignity,” said Laura Sanchez, Legal Director at the Central American Resource Center of Northern California.“The Administrative Procedure Act is a cornerstone of accountable government, requiring agencies to act with reason and transparency. The Trump administration has trampled on these requirements.The government failed to consider alternatives and disregarded profound constitutional and human costs. We hope the court will see these failures and vacate both policies.” said Mark Hejinian, Partner at Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP.