The state's records show 34 reported incidents resulting in 30 civil arrests in June 2026, followed by 28 incidents and 28 arrests the next month. Bonta says the arrests have caused witnesses, victims, and domestic violence survivors to fear going to court, and that proceedings have been delayed, interrupted, or dropped. ICE defends the practice as a common-sense way to arrest people where authorities know they will be. Courthouse arrests began in May 2025 under new ICE guidance. A federal court vacated the written directive in late June 2026 in Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, and Bonta says enforcement has continued anyway. The complaint describes the June ruling as making the practice illegal, though the full scope of how the court's order is being applied is not yet public.
Attorneys should watch whether the Central District moves quickly on any preliminary relief, and whether the case turns on the Pablo Sequen order, which would make the question one of compliance rather than policy. The filing is California's 100th lawsuit against the second Trump administration, reached in 21 months, so it is part of a sustained pattern of state litigation. The White House points to court rulings holding immigration enforcement lawful, so the outcome will likely turn on how the court weighs enforcement authority against the state's claims. Practitioners with courthouse-adjacent matters, including family, domestic violence, and criminal defense, should track how the arrest data develops and document any incidents in their own cases.