Faced with influx, prosecutor in Washington says he lacks resources to defend immigration cases
Amid a surge of habeas petitions alleging unlawful immigrant detention, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington says it lacks the resources to defend all cases and will let judges decide without government opposition. Acting U.S. Attorney Charles Floyd warns that prolonged litigation drains staffing and delays other civil work, prompting a plan to decline defense in many habeas actions. The move comes as courts have frequently ruled against the administration in detention challenges, fueling frustration among officials and advocates over ICE’s detention practices amid a hardline immigration approach. The issue intersects with ongoing Supreme Court scrutiny of whether detainees in the U.S. have a right to bond hearings, with different circuits yielding conflicting rulings. Forward momentum hinges on how courts, Congress, and the administration resolve resource constraints and legal standards for detention hearings.
Dive Deeper:
A surge in petitions from people alleging unlawful detention by federal immigration authorities prompted the Western District of Washington to reassess case defense resources. The Acting U.S. Attorney stated that habeas cases trigger protracted litigation with many hearings, briefs, and motions that strain prosecutors’ capacity.
The office will no longer assume responsibility for defending respondents in many habeas cases in order to conserve resources, without specifying the exact number affected. The backlog has limited the government’s ability to respond to immigration petitions and hindered attention to other civil matters.
Judges have frequently ruled against the administration in detention cases filed by tens of thousands of detainees challenging ICE actions, fueling frustration among officials and advocates who accuse ICE of trampling individual rights under a hardline immigration agenda.
Border czar Tom Homan recently claimed that about 85,000 immigration habeas cases have overwhelmed the courts amid the crackdown, highlighting the scale of the nationwide litigation challenge.
The broader context includes a Supreme Court review on whether long-term immigrants in the U.S. have a right to a hearing before detention while deportation is pursued, with a split among circuits on the necessity of bond hearings. Most circuits have found detaining immigrants without a bond hearing violates federal law, while the 5th and 8th circuits have reached opposite conclusions.
Charles Floyd, a former judge, and three other Washington judges have advocated restricting bond hearings for detainees, a position that now sits before the high court and adds to the legal contest surrounding detention practices.