Filed Date: Dec. 19, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This is a challenge to public and non-public guidance expanding "expedited removal," the process through which low-level Department of Homeland Security immigration officers summarily deport individuals from the United States without any meaningful review and without judicial review.
On December 19, 2025, Make the Road New York, a non-profit community organization, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against Kristi Noem, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and the heads of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Make the Road had previously challenged the expansion of expedited removal and a prior publicly-disclosed guidance memorandum in Make the Road New York v. Noem, No. 25-cv-00190. In this lawsuit, it challenged different guidance, issued on February 28, 2025 to "All ICE Employees" but made public in October 2025, as well as other undisclosed writings concerning the expansion. Among other things, the February 28 Guidance requires that persons designated for expedited removal bear the burden of showing continuous presence for two years, and provides that ICE may terminate ongoing removal proceedings of current applicants and place them into expedited removal. Plaintiffs asserted that this and other, undisclosed, related guidance (collectively, the "Guidance"): deprived them of meaningful process before removal in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment; violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), because, pursuant to the INA, a person present in the interior is not inadmissible, and therefore the Guidance permitting expedited removal for such persons was not in accordance with law and in excess of statutory authority under the APA; and violated the INA and APA because the INA must be interpreted to provide meaningful process and minimal procedures to persons faced with expedited removal, and the Guidance foreclosing these procedures was therefore in excess of statutory authority and not in accordance with law; that the Guidance was arbitrary and capricious and did not comply with the APA's procedural requirements; and that the Guidance contravened the INA and APA by authorizing and directing the expedited removal of noncitizens who have filed affirmative applications for asylum. Plaintiff sought declaratory relief, an order staying the effective date of the Guidance, and order vacating the Guidance, and an order enjoining the defendants from applying the Guidance to noncitizens who had been present in the United States for more than 14 days or apprehended further than 100 miles from the border. The case was assigned to District Court Judge Jia M. Cobb.
This case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Calvin OConnell (1/15/2026)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72063598/parties/make-the-road-new-york-v-noem/
Galindo, Daniel Antonio (District of Columbia)
Goin, Lucia (District of Columbia)
Tan, Michael King (District of Columbia)
Wofsy, Cody H. (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72063598/make-the-road-new-york-v-noem/
Last updated March 6, 2026, 3:13 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Dec. 19, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Make the Road New York (“MRNY”) is a nonprofit, membership-based community organization that works to empower and assist immigrants and their communities.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Attorney Organizations:
ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
Kristi Noem
Pam Bondi (U.S. Department of Justice)
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
District of District of Columbia 1:25-cv-04455
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Content of Injunction:
National / Universal injunction
Issues
Immigration/Border: