A federal judge sharply criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement after government attorneys submitted court documents claiming an immigrant had a marijuana conviction when he was just 4 years old.
In an order issued Tuesday, West Virginia District Judge Irene Berger reprimanded the government for attaching what it said was evidence of the man’s criminal history in an effort to justify his continued detention and possible removal from the country. The filing included a document ICE “indicated” reflected the detainee’s record.
But the details did not match.
Judge Berger noted glaring discrepancies in birthdate, birthplace, parents’ names, and immigration status, calling out what she described as careless handling of information in a case involving a person’s liberty. She ultimately ordered the man’s release.
“This sloppiness further validates the Court’s concerns about the procedures utilized by the Respondents depriving people present in the United States of their liberty,” Berger wrote.
The incident marks the latest in a series of courtroom rebukes aimed at government lawyers defending the administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. Across multiple states, judges have expressed frustration over missed deadlines, noncompliance with court orders, and procedural errors tied to a surge in arrests and detention cases.
In recent weeks, at least two federal judges have held government attorneys in civil contempt in immigration-related matters. In Minnesota, a federal prosecutor was fined $500 per day for failing to return identification documents to a released detainee. In another case, a judge ordered the government to reimburse a detainee for travel expenses after he was transferred in violation of a court order and released without his belongings.
Courts nationwide are contending with a growing number of habeas corpus petitions filed by immigrants challenging the legality of their detention. Some judges have suggested that the mounting legal strain stems from the pace and scope of enforcement actions.
Against that broader backdrop, Judge Berger’s order underscores judicial concerns about accuracy and diligence in immigration proceedings — particularly when government filings are used to justify continued detention.
