ICE Denies Reason Access to Immigration Court In Miami Detention Center

"It appears that access to this court was improperly denied," an attorney for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press says.

Immigration courts are supposed to be open to the public, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) refused to allow a Reason reporter to enter a federal detention center in Miami where hearings take place.

And afterward the government more or less admitted we should have been let inside.

Yesterday, I drove up to the gate of the Krome Detention Center, an ICE facility on the western edge of Miami, and identified myself as a reporter who wanted to observe the immigration court inside. The guards look puzzled; court observers are out of the ordinary at immigration hearings.

But these are not ordinary times for U.S. immigration courts, and there have been numerous accusations of severe overcrowding and inhumane treatment at the Krome Detention Center since President Donald Trump's mass deportation program began. Those accusations sparked protests over the weekend outside the center.

I've walked into county, state, and federal courts over my career without complications, so I was surprised when the gate guards claimed that only lawyers and relatives were allowed into the immigration court. 

I was all the more surprised because I'd done a bit of homework before I left to go to the court. The Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) website for the Miami Krome Immigration Court states that "hearings are open to the public, with limited exceptions, as specified in law." The court website encourages the media to contact the EOIR to coordinate a visit, but it also says, "You do not need to notify the immigration court in advance of your visit." 

A fact sheet linked on the court site further asks court observers to give the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) two days' notice to "allow facility personnel sufficient time to process your visit request and to arrange for an escort." I decided over the weekend to go court-watching and didn't notice anything saying I couldn't show up unannounced. 

When I informed the agents what the court's website said, they told me to pull my car over to the side while they called their supervisor. After several minutes, one of the agents returned from the gatehouse and said, "Sorry, ICE supervisor says no."

The federal regulation governing access to immigration hearings states that immigration courts "shall be open to the public" and can only be closed by an immigration judge for several specific reasons, such as protecting witnesses, minors, or abused spouses.

"It appears that access to this court was improperly denied," says Renee Griffin, a staff attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "Federal regulations generally permit reporters and the public to observe proceedings in immigration courts across the country, and Krome Detention Center is no exception."

ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The Justice Department EOIR, on the other hand, responded promptly and helpfully, offering to coordinate with the Krome facility so I could plan another visit to court-watch. 

An EOIR spokesperson also said the office "notified DHS that the Miami Krome Immigration Court is open daily to the public."

That seems to be a tacit admission that I shouldn't have been turned away at the gate. It would be an absurdity if the court were open daily to the public but entry was restricted at the discretion of an ICE supervisor.

But it occurs to me now that when the EOIR highly encourages court observers to give advance notice of their visits, it may be a tactful way of warning that the staff at DHS detention centers might not appreciate the legal imperative of "shall be open" without a reminder.

I sent a follow-up inquiry to the EOIR asking if DHS could refuse entry to observers who showed up unannounced. The office did not immediately respond.

I didn't set out with the intention of driving all the way to the Krome Detention Center just to turn around—I would've much rather gone to court—but it is useful and instructive to occasionally stress test public access laws.

It's especially important when the Trump administration is dismantling oversight mechanisms and bullying institutions like media outlets and law firms into silence. Last month, the Trump administration gutted the three DHS offices with oversight of federal immigration detention.

As more internal checks on government power are removed, external checks like public access to government records and proceedings become even more vital. And reporters, concerned citizens, and watchdog groups will need to assert them all the more forcefully.