The Justice Department urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on 1 February to overturn a Maryland district-court injunction that bars Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from arresting non-citizens during marriage-based green-card interviews. Government lawyers argued that individuals with final removal orders have “no lawful presence” and that the provisional-waiver programme they are pursuing “confers no protection from deportation.”(washingtonpost.com)
The lower-court ban, issued in 2024, arose from a class-action lawsuit alleging that ICE used green-card interviews as a “honeypot” to detain spouses of U.S. citizens despite Department of Homeland Security guidance encouraging such families to regularise status. Plaintiffs say the tactic chills bona-fide applicants, undermining a policy crafted in 2013 and expanded in 2016 to reduce family separation.(washingtonpost.com)
![Justice Department Asks Appeals Court to Restore ICE Arrests at Marriage-Based Green Card Interviews]()
During oral argument, judges pressed both sides on whether DHS had formally rescinded prior guidance and whether ICE officers specifically target interview locations. A ruling against the government would solidify protections across the Fourth Circuit—covering Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina—and could inspire similar litigation elsewhere.(washingtonpost.com)
For employers, the case matters because it affects the willingness of undocumented family members of U.S. staff to engage with the immigration system. A decision that revives interview-site arrests could deter eligible applicants from legalising status, thus prolonging work-authorization constraints and spousal mobility challenges. The court has not indicated when it will issue its opinion.
The lower-court ban, issued in 2024, arose from a class-action lawsuit alleging that ICE used green-card interviews as a “honeypot” to detain spouses of U.S. citizens despite Department of Homeland Security guidance encouraging such families to regularise status. Plaintiffs say the tactic chills bona-fide applicants, undermining a policy crafted in 2013 and expanded in 2016 to reduce family separation.(washingtonpost.com)
During oral argument, judges pressed both sides on whether DHS had formally rescinded prior guidance and whether ICE officers specifically target interview locations. A ruling against the government would solidify protections across the Fourth Circuit—covering Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina—and could inspire similar litigation elsewhere.(washingtonpost.com)
For employers, the case matters because it affects the willingness of undocumented family members of U.S. staff to engage with the immigration system. A decision that revives interview-site arrests could deter eligible applicants from legalising status, thus prolonging work-authorization constraints and spousal mobility challenges. The court has not indicated when it will issue its opinion.
Source: The Washington Post
