DHS again restricts lawmaker visits to ICE detention facilities

Chris Johnson, CQ-Roll Call on Jan 12, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

WASHINGTON — House Democrats renewed their legal challenge Monday to the Trump administration’s restrictions on congressional oversight visits to immigration detention facilities, after the Department of Homeland Security released new guidance requiring a seven-day wait period.

In a court filing Monday, attorneys representing the lawmakers called on Judge Jia M. Cobb of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia to seek clarity from DHS on why the newest guidance does not violate Section 527 of the appropriations law for the department, which spells out the authority for members of Congress to make unannounced visits to immigration detention facilities.

Cobb sided with Democratic lawmakers last month, in an opinion that found a previous Trump administration policy first announced in June is likely contrary to Section 527 because it effectively required members of Congress to give a seven-day notice before making a visit.

The lawmakers in the Monday filing point out that DHS says the newest guidance uses a different funding source and “therefore purports not to be subject to the limitations of Section 527,” but adds that argument doesn’t hold up.

“(I)t is practically impossible that the development, promulgation, communication, and implementation of this policy has been, and will be, accomplished — as required — without using a single dollar of annually appropriated funds subject to Section 527,” the lawmaker filing states.

In a group statement, Rep. Joe Neguse of Colorado and the other lawmakers said they are going back to court because DHS is attempting to get around the prior order “by re-imposing the same unlawful policy.”

“This is unacceptable. Oversight is a core responsibility of Members of Congress, and a constitutional duty we do not take lightly. It is not something the executive branch can turn on or off at will,” the group said.

The Justice Department notified the court Saturday about the new guidance, which was dated Jan. 8 and signed by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

That notification came the same day members of a Minnesota congressional delegation, consisting of Reps. Ilhan Omar, Angie Craig and Kelly Morrsion, said they were denied access to the Whipple federal building in Minneapolis, an immigration detention facility.

Morrison, in an interview on MS NOW on Saturday, said local officials initially granted lawmakers access to the facility, but their visits were ended “very abruptly.”

“We were told to leave,” Morrison said. “We met with two of the commanding officers, and they told us the reason we were not able to stay and meet with any detainees is because the funding for ICE came from the ‘Big Beautiful Bill.'”

The incident comes on the heels of outcry over an ICE agent fatally shooting Renee Good, a 37-year-old U.S. citizen, in Minneapolis after a highly disputed interaction that resulted in calls for an independent investigation. Defenders of the ICE agent say he acted in self-defense, while critics say the level of force was unjustified.

Noem in the new guidance bases DHS authority for a new seven-day wait period for lawmakers to gain access to immigration facilities on funding for the facilities coming from the reconciliation law President Donald Trump signed on July 4, which she refers to as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

The guidance cites a line from the Cobb’s order that those funds “are not subject to Section 527’s limitations.”

“Given the extent of the funding made available to ICE through the OBBBA, I anticipate that there is more than sufficient funding available for the limited expenses associated with implementing and enforcing these policies,” Noem said.

Noem said the basis for the policy is that advanced notice is necessary to “ensure adequate protection” for members of Congress, their staff, detainees and ICE employees.

“Unannounced visits require pulling ICE officers away from their normal duties,” Noem wrote. “Moreover, there is an increasing trend of replacing legitimate oversight activities with circus-like publicity stunts, all of which creates a chaotic environment with heightened emotions.”

Attorneys with the Democracy Forward Foundation and American Oversight, who are representing House Democrats, say the Trump administration “secretly” imposed the new guidance and it came to light after ICE denied lawmakers access to the facility in Minnesota.

“Only after this denial, and following outreach from Plaintiffs’ counsel to Defendants’ counsel, did Defendants notify Plaintiffs and the Court of the duplicate notice policy,” the filing states.