Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Read more
A federal judge ruled Tuesday that immigration officers in Colorado can only arrest people without a warrant if they think those people are likely to flee.
U.S. District Senior Judge R. Brooke Jackson issued the order in a legal challenge brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado and other lawyers.
They’re representing four people, including asylum-seekers, who were arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without warrants this year as part of President Donald Trump’s increased immigration enforcement. The lawsuit accuses immigration officers of indiscriminately arresting Latinos to meet enforcement goals without evaluating what’s required to legally detain them.
Jackson said each of those who sued had longstanding ties to their communities and no reasonable officer could have concluded they were likely to flee before getting a warrant to arrest them.
Before arresting anyone without a warrant, immigration officers must have probable cause to believe both that someone is in the country illegally and that they are likely to flee before an arrest warrant can be obtained, under federal law, he said. Jackson also said immigration officers needed to document the reasons for why they are arresting someone.
Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, called it an “activist ruling” and said the department follows the law.
“Allegations that DHS law enforcement engages in ‘racial profiling’ are disgusting, reckless, and categorically FALSE,” she said in a statement.
The ruling is similar to one made earlier this year in a case brought by another chapter of the ACLU in California involving arrests by Border Patrol agents. The government has appealed that ruling.
Another judge had also issued a restraining order barring federal agents from stopping people based solely on their race, language, job or location in the Los Angeles area after finding that they were conducting indiscriminate stops. The Supreme Court lifted that order in September.
McLaughlin suggested the government would appeal the Colorado ruling.
“The Supreme Court recently vindicated us on this question elsewhere, and we look forward to further vindication in this case as well,” she said.