Mata Velasquez v. Kurzdorfer: Stopping courthouse arrests of immigrants

Case Citation

Mata Velasquez v. Kurzdorfer, 25-cv-0493 (W.D.N.Y. filed June 6, 2025)

Tags

This case challenges the illegal courthouse arrest and detention of Oliver, a nineteen-year-old asylum seeker. Oliver did everything the U.S. government asked him to: he scheduled and attended an appointment at the U.S. border to seek asylum. He applied for and was granted permission to live and work in the U.S. while his asylum application was pending. And he went to all of his scheduled immigration court hearings in his asylum case.

But when he showed up to immigration court in New York City on May 21, 2025 for a routine hearing on his case, masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested him and locked him in a detention center hundreds of miles away.

Oliver’s arrest is one of thousands taking place in immigration courts across the country. Under a new detention policy, the U.S. government lures people to immigration court with the promise that they will be able to argue their case before a judge. Once at the hearing, the judge dismisses the case. ICE agents, waiting outside the courtroom doors, then arrest the person and transport them to an immigration detention center for expedited removal, a form of deportation that doesn’t include the right to see a judge.

What is the legal argument in this case?

The U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment guarantees due process to all people at risk of a deprivation of liberty, regardless of immigration status. When the government detains someone, due process requires that detention bear a reasonable relationship to a legitimate purpose, like preventing a risk of flight.

Oliver’s arrest and detention violate his right to due process because they are wholly unjustified and unrelated to any individualized consideration of his circumstances. In the time Oliver has lived in the United States, he has done all he can to integrate into his community, begin to learn English, and lawfully work. He dreams of beginning an education in the United States and continuing to establish roots in this country. He is plainly not a flight risk—evidenced by his dutiful appearance at his scheduled immigration court date.

Oliver was arrested and detained, along with countless others, not because of any legitimate flight risk, but as part of a nationwide campaign to summarily arrest law-abiding, noncitizens when they attend their immigration court hearings.

What is the status of this case?

A district court found that Oliver’s ambush courthouse arrest by ICE violated his due process rights. It ordered him immediately released and enjoined his re-detention while his case remains pending in immigration court.

In its decision ordering Oliver’s release, the district court wrote:

“[T]here is something fundamentally unfair about the government’s changing the rules by fiat simply because it wants to. That is arbitrary by definition. And that is especially troubling here, where [Oliver] played by the first set of rules without any hint of a violation and spent his time and money accepting the government’s invitation and coming here to play by those rules. Luring noncitizens here . . . and then telling them “never mind” is just plain wrong—made even worse when the noncitizens are detained while their cases are heard. And a change in administration does not justify or excuse such fundamental unfairness.”

Case Partners

New York Civil Liberties Union

The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) advances civil rights and civil liberties so that all New Yorkers can live with dignity, liberty, justice, and equality.
Prisoners’ Legal Services of New York

PLSNY’s mission is to provide high quality, effective legal representation and assistance to indigent prisoners, help them to secure their civil and human rights, and advocate for more humane prisons and for a more humane criminal justice system.

plsny.org