Judge Halts Trump Policy That Kept Detained Immigrants From Completing Legal-Status Applications

A federal judge in Washington has put on hold a Trump administration policy that ended the collection of fingerprints and photographs from detained immigrants with pending applications. Biometric screening is a mandatory step in seeking legal status, so without it, applicants were effectively shut out of protections Congress created for some of the country’s most vulnerable people.

The ruling

U.S. District Judge Amir H. Ali issued the order on Wednesday, October 7, 2026. He found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had not adequately explained why it stopped collecting biometrics from detainees with applications in the pipeline, and concluded the plaintiffs were likely to prove the policy was “arbitrary and capricious.”

The order pauses the policy while the lawsuit proceeds and restores the previous biometrics process. It does not grant anyone a visa or legal status, and it does not release anyone from detention.

What the policy did

The policy took effect in December 2025. Under it, DHS largely stopped collecting fingerprints, photographs and other biometric data from detained people, including unaccompanied children, who had applications before U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). That covered people seeking permanent residency, visas for victims of trafficking and serious crimes, and other humanitarian protections.

Biometrics let authorities confirm identity and run background and security checks. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had previously helped detainees complete them, including by transporting them to appointments. The administration dropped that duty but left in place rules allowing USCIS to deny applications when people miss required appointments. Detainees cannot get to appointments on their own, and detention was not accepted as grounds for rescheduling.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers called this an “impossible trap”: applicants had to submit biometrics, the government would not collect them, and applications were then denied for noncompliance.

The government’s defense

USCIS said the policy was intended to discourage frivolous filings and create operational consistency. In court, the administration also argued that detainees could ask ICE to collect their biometrics and that some could pursue their applications after being deported.

The court was unconvinced. It agreed with the plaintiffs that the policy mostly blocked legitimate applicants, and it pointed out that biometrics help officials verify identities and run background checks, which undercuts the claim that dropping them screens out fraud.

The hearing may have been telling. Asked how the policy advanced its stated goals, a government attorney replied that it was a good question and that there was no answer available at the moment.

Who brought the case

Six detained immigrants filed the class-action suit in April, titled J.Z. v. Department of Homeland Security. They are represented by Democracy Forward, the National Immigration Project and the National Immigrant Justice Center.

The plaintiffs include survivors of human trafficking and domestic violence, a young person seeking protection after childhood abuse, and an immigrant married to a U.S. citizen. Their lawyers argued the policy violated federal immigration law, constitutional due process and the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies make decisions. The ruling notes that some plaintiffs have been detained for more than a year and that many are established survivors of child abuse, domestic violence and trafficking.

Why the order extends beyond the six plaintiffs

The administration argued that any relief should be limited to the named plaintiffs. Judge Ali disagreed and suspended the policy for all detained immigrants with pending USCIS applications, which is why the order is being described as nationwide. He declined to issue a separate preliminary injunction, finding the suspension enough for now.

He also found the plaintiffs likely to show a serious risk of irreparable harm, including prolonged detention, deportation and family separation. As Newsweek summarized it, the policy exposed applicants to ongoing detention and possible removal before their applications could even be reviewed.

The protections at stake

According to the plaintiffs’ legal team, the policy blocked access to relief established by Congress for survivors of trafficking and domestic violence, abused and abandoned children, and people seeking to reunite with family. The case page also lists asylum seekers and spouses of U.S. citizens among those affected.

The legal team called the ruling a win for the rule of law, saying the government cannot erect impossible barriers to relief and then penalize people for failing to clear them. It said the fight would continue.

What comes next

The administration must report to the court by October 21, 2026, on how it is complying. Because the underlying case is unresolved, the suspension is temporary. Newsweek said it contacted DHS for comment outside business hours, and no published DHS response has been found.

The decision comes amid a wider run of legal challenges to the administration’s immigration agenda. The administration maintains that its measures are needed for border security and public safety, while a number of them are being contested in court.

FAQ

What did the court block?
A December 2025 DHS policy that stopped collecting fingerprints and photographs from detained immigrants with pending USCIS applications.

Who is the judge?
U.S. District Judge Amir H. Ali of the District of Columbia.

Why do biometrics matter?
They allow authorities to verify identity and conduct background and security checks, and many applications require them.

Does the ruling grant anyone legal status?
No. It restores biometrics collection but does not grant status or a visa, or free anyone from detention.

Does it apply only to the six plaintiffs?
No. It covers all detained immigrants with pending USCIS applications.

What was the government’s justification?
USCIS said it wanted to deter frivolous claims and ensure operational consistency.

Who is affected?
Detained people seeking protections such as relief for trafficking and abuse survivors, abused children, and family-based status.

Is the case over?
No. The ruling is temporary while litigation continues in J.Z. v. DHS.

What is the next deadline?
DHS must file a compliance report by October 21, 2026.