WASHINGTON — A federal judge more permanently stopped a Department of Homeland Security policy Monday that would require a seven-day notice for members of Congress to visit immigration detention centers.

In an opinion, Judge Jia M. Cobb of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colombia halted Homeland Security Kristi Noem’s latest versions of the restrictions. That ruling would last until the conclusion of a legal challenge from 13 House members.

The lawmakers who sued the Trump administration contend the policy violated Section 527 of fiscal 2025 appropriations law, which grants members of Congress authority to make unannounced visits to immigration detention facilities.

Cobb, in the ruling Monday, concluded lawmakers were likely to succeed in challenging the DHS policy based on the nature of appropriations and the Administrative Procedure Act.

“The record thus reflects that various offices and employees involved in promulgating the notice policy are funded through DHS’s annual appropriations, to which Section 527 attaches,” Cobb wrote. “There is also evidence that funds used to enforce the policy were paid for by annual appropriations rather than any other funds.”

Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement the judge’s decision would restore lawmakers’ ability to “conduct essential oversight on behalf of the American people.”

“This is yet another victory against an administration whose cruel and inhumane immigration policies have inflicted a heavy toll on communities across the nation,” Neguse said.

The Trump administration had argued DHS need not follow the spending provision because the department was operating under funds from last year’s reconciliation law, and therefore not subject to the same requirement as regular appropriations.

The Trump administration quickly filed a notice that it would appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit.

Cobb’s ruling Monday follows her earlier orders on prior versions of the policy, with DHS offering contrasting rationales getting around the judge’s order.

Cobb in a Dec. 17 decision blocked DHS from implementing a June 2025 policy requiring a seven-day notice from lawmakers. Noem on Jan. 8 issued a new policy, asserting it was implemented using only funds from the reconciliation package and not fiscal 2025 appropriations.

Cobb in her latest decision said the timing of the new policy “was perhaps not a coincidence,” pointing out DHS issued the document as it escalated immigration enforcement actions, including a massive operation in Minnesota. The policy was put in place in the aftermath of a federal agent fatally shooting Renee Gold, 37, a U.S. citizen.

Cobb had issued a temporary order stopping that new version on Feb. 2, Cobb wrote. In response, Noem issued a memorandum that same day asserting the funding under appropriations had lapsed and issued a new policy that was identical to the Jan. 8 policy, Cobb wrote.

DHS then notified the court that DHS funding had lapsed at the start of the current partial government shutdown on Feb. 14.

Cobb in her decision wrote that the current government shutdown does not present an obstacle in the lawmakers’ challenge, pointing out the lawsuit “was a backwards-looking challenge” addressing how the DHS policy was issued.

“Plaintiffs’ challenge asks whether the agency, at the time it made its decision, acted impermissibly under governing law,” Cobb wrote. “The fact that appropriated funds have now lapsed does not mean that Section 527 has been repealed or wiped off the books, or otherwise did not impose a limitation on the agency in January and early February 2026.”

_____

©2026 CQ-Roll Call, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Visit cqrollcall.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.