Trump’s immigration crackdown is straining federal courts. Judges are raising the alarm

ATLANTA (AP) — Federal judges around the country are scrambling to address a deluge of lawsuits from immigrants locked up under the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.

Under past administrations, people with no criminal record could generally request a bond hearing before an immigration judge while their cases wound through immigration court unless they were stopped at the border. President Donald Trump ‘s White House reversed that policy in favor of mandatory detention.

Immigrants by the thousands have been turning to federal courts by using another legal tool: habeas corpus petitions. While the administration scored a major legal victory Friday, here’s a look at how that’s affecting federal courts and what some judges have done in response:

Judges are raising the alarm

In one federal court district in Georgia, the enormous volume of habeas petitions has created “an administrative judicial emergency,” a judge wrote in a court order on Jan. 29. U.S. District Judge Clay Land in Columbus said the Trump administration was refusing to provide bond hearings to immigrants at Georgia’s Stewart Detention Center despite his ”clear and definitive rulings” against mandatory detention. Instead, the court had to order the hearing in each individual case, wrote Land, a nominee of Republican President George W. Bush.

In Minnesota, where the administration’s immigration enforcement surge continues, U.S. District Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz said in a Jan. 26 order Trump officials had made “no provision for dealing with the hundreds of habeas petitions and other lawsuits that were sure to result.” The court had received more than 400 habeas petitions in January alone, according to a filing by the government in a separate case.

Schiltz, who was also nominated by Bush, said in a separate order two days later that the government since January had failed to comply with scores of court decisions ordering it to release or provide other relief to people arrested during Operation Metro Surge.

And in the Southern District of New York, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian said in an opinion in December that the district had been “flooded” with petitions for relief from immigrants who posed no flight risk or danger but were nonetheless imprisoned indefinitely. Subramanian, who was nominated by President Joe Biden, a Democrat, and presides in New York City, granted a 52-year-old Guinean woman’s habeas petition and ordered her release.

“No one disputes that the government may, consistent with the law’s requirements, pursue the removal of people who are in this country unlawfully,” he wrote. “But the way we treat others matters.”

The administration defends its actions

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement on Friday that the administration was “more than prepared to handle the legal caseload necessary to deliver President Trump’s deportation agenda for the American people.”

DHS and the Justice Department, which also emailed a statement, slammed the judiciary.

“If rogue judges followed the law in adjudicating cases and respected the Government’s obligation to properly prepare cases, there wouldn’t be an ‘overwhelming’ habeas caseload or concern over DHS following orders,” the Justice Department statement said.

On Friday, a federal appeals court backed the administration’s policy of detaining immigrants without bond. The 2-1 ruling by a panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marked a major legal victory for the government and countered a slew of recent lower court decisions that argued the practice was illegal.

Immigration attorneys accuse the administration of flouting a key court decision

In November, a federal judge in California ruled that the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy was illegal. U.S. District Judge Sunshine Sykes in Riverside, who was also nominated by Biden, later expanded the scope of the decision to apply to detained immigrants nationwide.

But plaintiffs’ attorneys said the administration continued to deny bond hearings.

“This was a clear cut example of blatant defiance, blatant disregard of a court’s order,” Matt Adams, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, told The Associated Press in January.

According to Sykes, the government argued her decision was “advisory” and told immigration judges, who work for the Justice Department and are not part of the judicial branch, to ignore it. The judge said she found the latter instruction “troubling.”

In its statement, DHS said “activist judges have attempted to thwart President Trump from fulfilling the American people’s mandate for mass deportations.”

Judges are trying to find ways to ease the burden

Land, the federal judge in Georgia, directed other judges in his district to immediately order the government to provide bond hearings to immigrants who meet criteria established by two previous habeas cases.

Maryland District Court Chief Judge George L. Russell III has ordered the administration not to immediately remove any immigrants who file habeas petitions with his court, under certain conditions. Russell, who was nominated by President Barack Obama, a Democrat, said in an amended order in December that the court had received an influx of habeas petitions after hours that “resulted in hurried and frustrating hearings.”

In Tacoma, Washington, U.S. District Judge Tiffany Cartwright ordered the administration last month to give immigrants detained at a processing center in Tacoma notice of her ruling that the mandatory detention policy was illegal. Cartwright, who was also nominated by Biden, said the high volume of habeas filings had put a “tremendous strain” on immigration attorneys and the court.