Court lets lawmakers keep unannounced ICE detention visits for now

A federal appeals court left in place, for now, an order allowing Democratic lawmakers to make unannounced visits to ICE detention facilities, keeping alive a fight over whether the Department of Homeland Security can force Congress to give a week’s notice before exercising oversight.

U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb said on Feb. 2, 2026, that DHS likely violated Section 527, a longstanding appropriations rider Democrats say protects unannounced access to detention sites. Cobb extended a temporary restraining order covering 13 Democratic members of Congress who sued after the department revived its notice rule in January 2026, following an earlier version she had already blocked in December 2025. She found lawmakers would suffer irreparable harm if they were kept from timely inspections.

The dispute centers on what congressional oversight can actually reveal inside ICE facilities. Lawmakers and advocates argue that surprise visits are the only way to see conditions as detainees experience them, not as they appear after advance preparation. The plaintiffs said in August 2025 that ICE was detaining more than 58,000 people, while reports were growing of mistreatment, overcrowding, unsanitary conditions and even the detention of U.S. citizens. They also said ICE had turned lawmakers away from a detention-related site in Minnesota, the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis, even after they presented a valid court order.

DHS first issued its advance-notice policy in June 2025, then revived it in January 2026 with a new memorandum that said requests by members of Congress had to be submitted at least seven days in advance. The department said the rule was justified by “significant and sometimes violent incidents at ICE facilities,” and argued that ICE field offices were not detention facilities. It also claimed the revived policy could be funded only through the July 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Cobb rejected that theory at this stage, saying plaintiffs showed DHS had already used some Section 527-restricted appropriations to develop and enforce the notice policy.

The case has become a broader test of transparency and executive accountability as detention levels have climbed and scrutiny over ICE conditions has intensified. The plaintiffs include Joe Neguse, Adriano Espaillat, Bennie Thompson, Jamie Raskin, Robert Garcia, J. Luis Correa, Jason Crow, Veronica Escobar, Dan Goldman, Jimmy Gomez, Raúl Ruiz and Norma Torres, along with at least one additional House Democrat. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons are defendants. For now, the court has kept the door open to unannounced congressional oversight inside the nation’s immigration detention system.