Tacoma’s Immigration Judges and Their Influence on National Policy

In Tacoma, Washington, four immigration judges have played a crucial role in redefining immigration enforcement long before it became a national issue. The denial of bond for many held on immigration charges has sparked tens of thousands of lawsuits since July, claiming violations of constitutional rights.

The Trump administration faced a significant legal challenge when an appeals court overturned its policy. This decision set the stage for a potential Supreme Court review, after two other appeals courts had supported the administration’s stance.

Early Changes in Tacoma

Years ago, immigration judges at the Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma began denying bond, a practice that went largely unnoticed outside local immigration attorneys. When the Trump administration later adopted this approach, it mirrored the reasoning of the Tacoma judges. Neil Floyd, a key figure among the judges, revealed that clerks researched the legality for months before deciding that Congress never granted them the authority to issue bonds.

This decision was based on a 1996 law that mandated the detention of ‘applicants for admission’ to the U.S. The law had been interpreted to affect those who recently crossed the border illegally, while long-term residents were typically eligible for bond hearings. However, the Tacoma judges concluded that detention was required until an asylum decision was reached.

Impact and Controversy

For the Tacoma judges—Theresa Scala, John Odell, Tammy Fitting, and Neil Floyd—this interpretation was a matter of fairness. By law, those entering legally and requesting asylum at a port of entry should be detained. Immigration attorneys saw this as an overly prosecutorial stance to keep detainees locked up. Matt Adams from the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project criticized the practice, noting it disregarded years of precedent.

National Adoption of Tacoma’s Perspective

By July, ICE aligned its policies with the Tacoma view, arguing that long-term residents without legal entry were ‘applicants for admission’ and required mandatory detention. This resulted in ICE doubling its custody numbers and planning to further expand detention capacities.

Immigrants held by ICE, many previously eligible for bond, now faced the threat of prolonged detention. More than 40,000 lawsuits have emerged, contesting this treatment. However, some immigrants have succeeded in court, winning freedom or hearings.

Personal Experiences

Victor Cruz’s story illustrates the harsh reality faced by many. Arrested without a warrant, he spent 24 days in the Tacoma center before securing release through a bond hearing. Cruz eventually triumphed in his immigration case, highlighting the uncertainty many face today.

Judge Fitting, one of the original four, continues to hold bond hearings as ordered by federal judges. In one session, she denied bond to an Oregon resident with a past conviction but granted a $14,000 bond to another with no criminal history, though his legal status remained uncertain.

The evolving role of Tacoma judges and their decisions reflects broader tensions in U.S. immigration policy, balancing legal interpretations and human lives.