A federal court recently ruled on a significant case involving immigration applicants who have been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The case, Z. v. United States Department of Homeland Security, Civil Action No. 2026-1510, was decided by Judge Amir H. Ali in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The court's decision addresses a policy change by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that halted the collection of biometric information from detained individuals applying for immigration status.
The plaintiffs in this case are individuals who have pending applications with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for various immigration statuses, including permanent residency and asylum. They argue that the new DHS policy violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and impairs their ability to pursue their immigration applications. This ruling is crucial as it could impact many detained individuals seeking legal status in the U.S.
Background
The plaintiffs, who are currently detained by ICE, filed their lawsuit against DHS and other federal officials after the agency announced in December 2025 that it would stop collecting biometric data from detained individuals for USCIS applications. This biometric data typically includes fingerprints, photographs, and signatures, which are essential for processing immigration applications. The plaintiffs argue that without the collection of their biometrics, they cannot complete their applications, which could lead to their deportation.
The court noted that the plaintiffs' applications are critical for their immigration status, as many of them would not face deportation if their applications were approved. The plaintiffs' claims include various forms of relief, such as special immigrant juvenile status and T and U visas for victims of human trafficking and serious crimes. The plaintiffs moved for a stay of the new policy and a preliminary injunction to prevent its enforcement while the case is pending.
The Ruling
The court ruled partially in favor of the plaintiffs, granting a stay of the new biometrics policy but denying the request for a preliminary injunction. Judge Amir H. Ali concluded that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of success on their claim that the new policy was arbitrary and capricious. The court stated, "the plaintiffs are likely to show the defendants’ biometrics policy violates the APA" due to a lack of reasoned explanation for the change and failure to consider important aspects of the problem.
While the court recognized that the plaintiffs had satisfied their burden for a stay, it noted that they had not shown the need for a preliminary injunction. The ruling effectively restores the previous policy requiring DHS to collect biometrics from detained individuals with pending immigration applications, allowing them to pursue their cases without the risk of automatic denial due to missing biometrics appointments.
Impact
This ruling is significant for many detained individuals who rely on the collection of biometric data to support their immigration applications. By reinstating the previous policy, the court has provided a temporary reprieve for these individuals, allowing them to continue their pursuit of legal status in the U.S. The decision also sets a precedent for how the courts may view agency actions that significantly affect the rights of individuals, particularly in the realm of immigration.
Going forward, this ruling may encourage other detained individuals to challenge similar policies that could impede their ability to seek immigration relief. It highlights the importance of procedural fairness in the immigration process and the need for agencies to provide clear and justifiable reasons for policy changes that affect vulnerable populations.
What's Next
The defendants may appeal the court's decision, but details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The case will continue as the plaintiffs seek further remedies under the APA.