Suit seeks class-action status over alleged Fourth Amendment violation
Seven previously detained immigrants sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in federal court in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, alleging the agency is holding onto their passports, Social Security cards, employment-authorization papers, phones and car keys long after they were released from immigration custody.
The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks class-action status. It names ICE, ICE Acting Director David Venturella, the Department of Homeland Security, and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin as defendants. ICE and DHS did not immediately comment on the allegations.
According to the suit, ICE has withheld the property without any legal basis, in violation of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable seizures. “ICE has deprived people of such items for far longer than any conceivable governmental interest would justify, often months after the individuals were released from ICE custody,” the lawsuit says.
The complaint also accuses ICE of violating its own directives governing when the agency may keep immigrants’ property after their release. Those directives, the suit says, only permit the agency to retain items if it can articulate a clear reason — such as a connection to a criminal case or suspicion that the documents are fraudulent. Instead, the lawsuit alleges, ICE is holding a much broader swath of property and refusing to provide an explanation.
The seven named instances, the suit says, are evidence of a broader de facto policy under which ICE retains property belonging to released immigrants without explanation. At least some of the seven plaintiffs still have pending immigration cases.
The consequences for affected immigrants are concrete, according to the complaint: they have been unable to keep their jobs, have lost their homes, and fear going outside without proper documentation.
“If ICE has a legitimate operational reason to keep somebody’s property, it needs to identify it,” said Craig Martin, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs. “And if it doesn’t identify it, the Constitution and ICE’s own rules point to get the document back without delay.”