Faced with influx, prosecutor in Washington says he lacks resources to defend immigration cases

Faced with an influx of petitions by people alleging they’re being unlawfully detained by federal immigration authorities, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington said Monday that it no longer has the staffing to defend every case and will let judges rule without government opposition.

Acting U.S. Attorney Charles Floyd said in a letter to U.S. District Judge David Estudillo that habeas corpus cases initiate “protracted litigation” with numerous hearings, briefings and motions that consume prosecutors’ resources.

“Thus, going forward, in order to conserve resources, there will be many habeas cases in which the USAO will no longer assume responsibility for providing a defense on behalf of the respondents,” Floyd wrote.

The backlog has “severely impacted the government’s ability to respond” to immigration petitions and prevented prosecutors from dealing with other unrelated civil litigation, he said. As a result, his office will decline to defend “many” habeas cases. He didn’t specify how many cases could be affected.

Judges have often ruled against the administration in cases filed by tens of thousands of detainees arguing that they were being held illegally by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It has been a source of great frustration to administration officials — and to judges and advocates who say ICE has trampled on individual rights amid the Trump administration’s hardline immigration agenda.

Last week, U.S. border czar Tom Homan told Fox News that courts have been weighed down by about 85,000 immigration habeas cases as the government carries out a sweeping crackdown.

Floyd is a former judge who, along with three other Washington judges, advocated for prohibiting immigration courts from granting bond to detainees — a question that is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The justices will consider whether immigrants who have been living in the U.S. have a right to a hearing to determine if they should remain detained while challenging their possible deportation.

Most appeals courts to have considered the issue have found that it violates federal law to detain immigrants, including those living in the U.S. illegally, without a bond hearing. Those decisions conflict with rulings by the 5th and 8th circuits, which held that immigrants accused of illegally entering and remaining in the U.S. must be detained while their deportation cases are pending.