gents detain an individual as he exits immigration court in New York City in July. Immigrants released at the border are being targeted for arrest when they show up for court hearings. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Inside immigration courts around the country, immigrants who crossed the border illegally and were caught and released are required to appear before a judge for a preliminary hearing.

But in a new twist, the Trump administration has begun using an unexpected legal tactic in its deportation efforts. Rather than pursue a deportation case, it is convincing judges to dismiss immigrants’ cases — thus depriving the immigrants of protection from arrest and detention — then taking them into custody.

The practice, affecting immigrants released at the border and given a “notice to appear” in court under both the Trump and Biden administrations, sometimes leads to people being quickly deported by Immigration and Customs Enforcement through a process called expedited removal.

Many of the immigrants had requested asylum, as allowed under U.S. law. Late last month, advocates filed a lawsuit on behalf of a dozen immigrants unexpectedly arrested by ICE, often after having their cases dismissed.

When an immigrant crosses the border illegally and is caught, they may be given a “notice to appear,” or NTA, ordering them to appear before an immigration judge. It can sometimes take years, however, before their case comes up.

One of the immigrants in the lawsuit was caught at the border with Mexico and given a court appearance ticket in 2022 after fleeing Cuba. His opposition to forced conscription and the communist government in Cuba led to his arrest there and he was raped in custody, according to the lawsuit.

At his first hearing in U.S. immigration court in May, his case was dismissed with no reason given and his attorney agreed, thinking the relatively new maneuver was a positive development.

But as he left the Miami court, the immigrant was arrested and sent to Washington state for detention, thousands of miles from his family and his wife, who is a U.S. citizen, according to the lawsuit.

“The aftermath of these courthouse arrests and dismissals for placement in expedited removal wreaks further havoc on people’s lives,” according to a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice filed in July by a group of immigrant advocates. The group argued the practice is illegal and contrary to the traditional way people are treated when released at the border for court dates.

The lawsuit includes 12 immigrants: three from Cuba, three from Venezuela, two from Ecuador, two from Guinea and others from Liberia and the Chechen Republic. A Department of Justice spokesperson, Natalie Baldassarre, said the department had no comment on the lawsuit.

After a courthouse arrest in New York City in July, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told CBS News that the new policy “is reversing [President Joe] Biden’s catch and release policy that allowed millions of unvetted illegal aliens to be let loose on American streets.”

However, the Trump administration has also released immigrants seeking asylum at the border pending court dates, according to a June 27 report from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at the University of Syracuse, an organization that tracks federal statistics.

Almost 18,000 people were released at the border in May “even after Trump officials closed the border, vowed not to allow anyone in and to immediately detain anyone not legally in the country caught inside the U.S.,” the report stated.

Other immigration attorneys who spoke with Stateline described uprooted lives caused by the new practice of arresting people after they show up for court hearings, but the attorneys declined to speak on the record for fear of drawing negative attention to their clients’ cases.

Vanessa Dojaquez-Torres, practice and policy counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which represents more than 17,000 immigration attorneys and is not involved in the lawsuit, said the Department of Homeland Security is now arguing in court that anyone caught crossing the border should be arrested and detained, though it’s not happening in every case.

“There is a large number of people going to court and getting arrested, and also people in detention not getting let out,” Dojaquez-Torres said. “This happens to people with no criminal background, no negative immigration history — they might even have a sponsor that says, ‘We will house them and feed them and make sure they show up to their court hearings.’”

There are also cases of people arrested in court even if their case isn’t dismissed, Dojaquez-Torres said.

One of the immigrants in the lawsuit, a Venezuelan who said he faced persecution in his home country as a gay man with HIV, was arrested July 1 after a hearing in New York City even though his case is still active, according to the lawsuit.

One woman born in Venezuela, who fears persecution because of her sexual orientation and opposition to the Venezuelan government, applied for asylum within a year of entering the United States in 2022, but was arrested at her first court hearing May 27. She now faces an expedited removal order, which could mean an immediate deportation if she loses appeals. She is currently in detention in Ohio, according to the lawsuit.

Other cases mentioned in the lawsuit involved arrests at immigration courts in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Nevada.

Most of the immigrants mentioned in the lawsuit were caught crossing illegally. But two presented themselves at the border legally via an appointment set up through a phone app for asylum-seekers, CBP One, designed to limit the number of people who could cross the border asking for asylum. (The Trump administration shut down the app on its first day in office.)

In one of those cases, a gay man from Ecuador, facing government threats over his LGBTQ+ advocacy efforts, used the app in January and appeared in court June 4, according to the lawsuit.

The government moved to dismiss his case, and he was deported back to Ecuador within a month, despite asking for more time to file an asylum case, according to the suit. He is now living in hiding.

The class-action lawsuit has not yet been answered by the government, though the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, James Boasberg, ruled July 18 that the immigrants suing could use pseudonyms without identifying information as long as they provide real names and addresses in documents sealed from public view.

Courthouse arrests may cross a new line legally but they’re not likely to increase deportation significantly the way current large-scale workplace raids and transfers from local jails might, said Muzaffar Chishti, an attorney and policy expert at the Migration Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank. The administration’s goal of 1 million deportations a year still seems unlikely, he said.

Arrests declined in July over the previous month, but deportations increased, according to an Aug. 2 TRAC report, with 56,945 people in detention. The number of detainees will increase with more federal funding for detention, but is still unlikely to reach the level needed to deport a million people in a year, Chishti said.

The issue of courthouse arrests makes legal representation for immigrants all the more important, Chishti said.

“Even in these horrendous cases, if you have a lawyer, he’ll know how to handle it and say, ‘He can’t be removed, he’ll be subject to torture,’” Chishti said. “The difference between arrest and deportation could be the presence of a lawyer.”

Nevertheless, the prospect of arrest and detention during a case that may last years could make immigrants hesitant to show up for court dates, which in turn could make them subject to immediate deportation.

“If you don’t show up for a court date, they will enter what’s called an in absentia removal order. If you come into any contact with ICE after that, you will be most likely detained and removed,” Dojaquez-Torres said.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

A woman cries after her husband is detained by federal agents during a mandatory immigration check-in in June in New York City. The Trump administration’s arrests have been catching a smaller share of criminals overall, and a smaller share of people convicted of violent and drug crimes, than the Biden administration did in the same time frame last year. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Despite Trump administration rhetoric accusing Democrats of protecting violent criminals and drug-dealing immigrants, the administration’s arrests have been catching a smaller share of criminals overall, and a smaller share of people convicted of violent and drug crimes, than the Biden administration did in the same time frame.

While the Trump administration has caught more immigrants with convictions for drugs and violence, their share of the rising arrest numbers is smaller, as more people get swept up for minor traffic violations or strictly immigration crimes, according to a Stateline analysis.

Forty percent of the nearly 112,000 arrests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from Jan. 20 through late June were of convicted criminals. That’s compared with 53% of the nearly 51,000 arrests for same time period in 2024 under the Biden administration.

Worksite immigration raids are supposed to free up jobs for citizens. Here’s what really happens

The share of people convicted of violent crime fell from 10% to 7% and drug crimes from 9% to 5%, according to a Stateline analysis of data from the Deportation Data Project.

The project, led by attorneys and professors in California, Maryland and New York, collects and posts public, anonymized U.S. government immigration enforcement datasets obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests.

Some Democratic states are among those with the highest share of violent criminals in this year’s ICE arrests: Hawaii (15%), Vermont (13%), and California and Nebraska (12%) — while some of the lowest shares were in more Republican states: Maine (2%), and Alabama, Montana and Wyoming (3%).

Immigration attorneys see an increased push to arrest and detain immigrants for any type of violation or pending charge as President Donald Trump pushes for higher arrest and detention numbers to meet his campaign promise for mass deportation. Trump officials have called for 3,000 arrests a day, far more than the current average of 711 as of June and 321 a day during the same time period under Biden.

Arrests have accelerated since about mid-May, when government attorneys began asking to revoke bail and arrest people who show up for court hearings after being released at the border, said Vanessa Dojaquez-Torres, practice and policy counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which represents more than 16,000 immigration attorneys.

“We’re not completely sure what the reasoning or the goal is behind some of these policies, other than they want detention numbers up,” Dojaquez-Torres said.

“They seem to have really been struggling to get their deportation numbers up, and so I think that’s one of the reasons why we see a lot of these policies going into effect that are meant to kind of circumvent the immigration court process and due process.”

Arrests of people convicted of violent crimes increased by 45% from about 5,300 to 7,700 compared with last year. For drug crimes, the increase was 21% — and they fell as a share of total arrests, from 9% under the Biden administration to 5% this year.

If Trump wants more deportations, he’ll need to target the construction industry

 

Arrests for those not convicted of any crime nearly tripled to about 67,000, and increased from 47% to 60% of arrests.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security defended ICE arrests Wednesday. Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that the agency was “targeting dangerous criminal illegal aliens and taking them off American streets. Violent thugs ICE arrested include child pedophiles, drug traffickers, and burglars.”

In Oregon, arrests during the first part of last year increased from 51 under the Biden administration to 227 under the Trump administration, with those not convicted of any crime increasing from 34 to 137. Those with convictions for violent crime increased from 3 to 16. Even some Republicans are concerned with the new emphasis on non-criminals.

“The majority of recent ICE detentions involve people with no convictions. That’s a pattern I find troubling, especially when it risks sweeping up people for things like expired tags or missed court dates,” said Oregon state Rep. Cyrus Javadi, a moderate Republican representing Tillamook and Clatsop counties.

Nationally, nonviolent crimes have risen as a share of immigration arrests. The most common crime conviction for those arrested this year is driving while intoxicated, which was also the top offense last year under Biden.

But this year it’s closely followed by general traffic offenses, which rose to second place from sixth place, surpassing such crimes as assault and drug trafficking.

‘Sanctuary city’ governors object to Trump deployment of troops into Los Angeles

 

Traffic offenses, outside of driving while intoxicated and hit and run, rose almost fourfold as the most serious conviction on record for those arrested, the largest increase in the top 10. Those offenses were followed by increases in the immigration crime of illegal entry, meaning crossing the border in secret, which tripled.

The increase in traffic violations as a source of immigration arrests is a reason for cities to consider limiting traffic stops, said Daniela Gilbert, director of the Redefining Public Safety Initiative at the Vera Institute of Justice, a nonprofit devoted to ending mass incarceration.

“It’s an important point to consider intervening in so that there can be less interaction, and so ICE has less opportunity to continue its indiscriminate dragnet of enforcement,” Gilbert said.

The institute argues in general that traffic stops should be limited to safety issues rather than low-level infractions such as expired registrations or single burned-out taillights, both because they do not improve public safety and because they disproportionately affect drivers of color.

Such policies limiting stops under some conditions are in place in 10 states and in cities in six other states, according to the institute.

The most recent state polices took effect last year in California and Illinois, while a policy is set to take effect in October in Connecticut. The most recent city policies were in Denver and in East Lansing and Ypsilanti, Michigan. Six other states have considered legislation recently.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

New townhomes are under construction this year in Minnesota. Milwaukee joined two Minnesota counties along with dozens of cities and counties suing over Trump administration threats to tie federal funding for housing and other programs to local policy on immigration enforcement; diversity, equity and inclusion; and abortion. (Photo by Ellen Schmidt/Minnesota Reformer)

Twenty-eight cities and counties including Baltimore, Los Angeles, Milwaukee and Rochester, New York, joined a lawsuit July 10 challenging Trump administration attempts to withhold federal funds because of local policies on immigration enforcement; diversity, equity and inclusion; gender equity; and abortion access.

Funding for housing, transit, health care, civil rights and other essential programs has been threatened by new grant conditions, according to the lawsuit, which now includes 60 cities, counties and other entities.

U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein issued a restraining order in May against tying unrelated federal funds to ideological conditions, saying the Trump administration was forcing the local governments to “choose between accepting conditions that they believe are unconstitutional, and risking the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grant funding.”

The first places to sue in early May were three counties in Washington state, two more in California, plus Boston, Columbus, Ohio, and New York City. Since then, 52 cities, counties and other entities have joined from states including Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Wisconsin.

Two of the latest to join are Ramsey County and Hennepin County in Minnesota, where Minneapolis and St. Paul and located. Hennepin County has almost $272 million in federal funding for this year for things such as emergency shelter and road projects, all threatened by new grant conditions imposed by the Trump administration, according to the court filing.

“Communities shouldn’t have to lose critical services because of the Trump administration’s political agenda,” said Jill Habig, CEO of Public Rights Project, a nonprofit legal organization doing work in the case. “These federal funding conditions aim to strip billions of dollars from local governments working to help people thrive.”

Lawyers for the Trump administration opposed the injunction, saying the court had no authority to require the federal government to pay local governments grant money.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

Funding for housing, transit, health care, civil rights and other essential programs has been threatened by new grant conditions, according to the lawsuit, which now includes 60 cities, counties and other entities.

Funding for housing, transit, health care, civil rights and other essential programs has been threatened by new grant conditions, according to the lawsuit, which now includes 60 cities, counties and other entities.

Immigration officials questioned and detained contractors working on apartment buildings in Tallahassee, Fla., on May 29. Construction employs more immigrant laborers, many likely living here illegally, than any other industry, and the industry is starting to draw more attention — even in conservative states — as the Trump administration pushes for more deportations. (Photo by Jay Waagmeester/Florida Phoenix)

As President Donald Trump sends mixed messages about immigration enforcement, ordering new raids on farms and hotels just days after saying he wouldn’t target those industries, he has hardly mentioned the industry that employs the most immigrant laborers: construction.

Nevertheless, the Trump administration is going after construction workers without legal status to meet its mass deportation goals — even as the country has a housing shortage and needs new homes built. A shortage of workers has delayed or prevented construction, causing billions of dollars in economic damage, according to a June report from the Home Builders Institute.

Almost a quarter of all immigrants without a college degree work in construction, a total of 2.2 million workers as of last month, before work site raids began in earnest. That’s more than the next three industries combined: restaurants (1.1 million), janitorial and other cleaning services (526,000) and landscaping (454,000), according to a Stateline analysis of federal Current Population Survey data provided by ipums.org at the University of Minnesota.

Within the construction industry, immigrant workers are now a majority of painters and roofers (both 53%) and comprise more than two-thirds of plasterers and stucco masons. U.S. citizens in construction are more likely to work as managers and as skilled workers, such as carpenters.

Many immigrant workers are likely living here illegally, although there are some working legally as refugees or parolees, and others are asylum-seekers waiting for court dates. There’s also a small number of legal visas for temporary farmworkers, construction workers and others.

The pool of immigrant workers Stateline analyzed were employed noncitizens ages 18-65 without a college degree, screening out temporary workers with high-skill visas.

About half of the immigrant laborers in construction are working in Southern states, including conservative-leaning Florida, North Carolina and Texas, where there is more building going on, according to the Stateline analysis. Another 584,000, or one-quarter, are in Western states, including Arizona, California and Nevada.

In recent months, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, better known as ICE, has conducted construction worksite raids in Florida in Tallahassee and near Ocala, and in South Texas and New Orleans, as well as more immigrant-friendly California and Pennsylvania.

Roofers may have been the first targeted by new workplace raids because of their visibility, said Sergio Barajas, executive director of the National Hispanic Construction Alliance, a California-based advocacy group with chapters in five other states.

“That’s the first place we heard about it. Roofers are right out there where you can see them,” Barajas said. He added that all segments of construction work have been targeted for ICE raids, and that even some legal workers are not showing up for work out of fear.

“Six or eight weeks ago, I would have said we weren’t affected at all. Now we are. There’s a substantial reduction in the number of workers who are showing up, so crews are 30%, 40% smaller than they used to be,” Barajas said.

In residential construction, a system of contractors and subcontractors opens the door to abuses, said Enrique Lopezlira, director of the Low-Wage Work Program at the University of California, Berkeley Labor Center. Lopezlira said contractors hire workers, often immigrant laborers, for low-wage jobs and pay them in cash, to save money on benefits and make the lowest possible bid for projects.

“It becomes a blame game. The developers can say, ‘I hired this contractor and I thought he was above board and paying people a decent wage.’ And the contractors can say, ‘I rely on subcontractors,’” said Lopezlira. “It becomes a race to the bottom.”

In many places, residential construction draws more immigrant labor because of looser state and local regulations and lower pay. But in some states with weaker unions and rules that are less strict, such as Texas, the commercial construction industry also employs many immigrants who are here illegally.

Commercial construction labor costs are 40% lower in Texas than they are in large Northeastern cities where unions are more powerful, said David Kelly, a lecturer in civil and environmental engineering at the University of Michigan.

“The large difference [in cost] suggests workers and their employers in some regions are not paying for income taxes, overtime, Social Security or unemployment insurance,” Kelly said in an email. “Since undocumented workers have limited employment options they may be more willing than others to accept these conditions.”

Despite political claims that Democratic policies result in immigrants taking jobs others need, noncitizen immigrant laborers were about 7% of jobholders nationally as of May — about the same as 2015, according to the Stateline analysis.

That share has hardly budged over the past 10 years, including in 2019 under the first Trump administration, dipping to 6% only in 2020 and 2021.

In construction, however, the share of jobs held by immigrant laborers has increased from 19% in 2015 to 22% in 2024, according to the analysis. Immigrant laborers have gotten more than a third of the 1.5 million jobs added between 2015 and 2024, as home construction reached historic levels.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with the full name of  the University of California, Berkeley Labor Center and to clarify David Kelly’s remarks on regional labor costs. Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.