During an earlier hearing, Judge Cobb told the Department of Homeland Security that she would need to see more evidence proving that the agency has, in fact, completely changed its funding stream. Without this evidence, Cobb said, it would appear that the agency has blatantly disregarded and violated her previous order regarding congressional visitation rights.
A Washington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to immediately prohibit the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from requiring lawmakers to provide at least seven days’ notice before visiting and inspecting immigration detention facilities.
In her ruling, Judge Jia M. Cobb of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia did not address whether the policy itself is legal. Instead, Cobb said that the legislators who filed the lawsuit would need to revise their claims to address the Trump administration’s stated rationale.
Cobb, notes The New York Times, blocked an “essentially identical policy” in December, citing an appropriations law that funds the Department of Homeland Security and requires that facilities generally be open to congressional oversight. However, earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security tried to reinstate its restrictions. The agency has since argued that it can fund its detention centers solely through appropriations contained within President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.”
By adjusting its funding, the department said, it no longer needs to give lawmakers immediate access to immigration detention centers.
In her four-page order, Cobb said that the plaintiff legislators will need to address the government’s argument before proceeding. Nevertheless, Cobb emphasized that her decision revolves entirely around technical changes introduced by the Trump administration—not a lack of standing, insufficient evidence, or any other flaw with the case.
During an earlier hearing, Cobb told the Department of Homeland Security that she would need to see more evidence proving that the agency has, in fact, completely changed its funding stream. Without this evidence, Cobb said, it would appear that the agency has blatantly disregarded and violated her previous order regarding congressional visitation rights.
“I think taking steps to exclude members of Congress from facilities is the subject of my order,” Cobb said.
Christine Cogle, an attorney representing the nonprofit Democracy Forward, told Cobb said that the Trump administration is attempting to resurrect “the same exact policy” in the same exact form. Instead of addressing the lawsuit’s arguments in good faith, Cogle argued, the government is “trying to make a game” out of using new funds to “paper over” its failure to follow Cobb’s order.
“I just think that defendants cannot win that game, because appropriations are not a game—they are the law,” said Cogle, whose group is also representing the plaintiffs.
Cogle, adds the New York Times, provided several examples indicating that the Department of Homeland Security cannot claim to have fully abandoned congressional funding. These include salaries for top-level agency officials, as well as money spent on Microsoft Office and other licenses, which all devolve from congressional appropriations.
Sources
Judge Allows Policy Restricting Lawmakers’ Access to ICE Facilities
Judge allows Trump administration to block lawmakers’ access to ICE facilities
Join the conversation!