Legal Groups Sue ICE Over Hidden Locations of Detained Immigrants

Four legal services groups sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Massachusetts on October 28, 2026, challenging the withholding of locations for detained immigrants with final removal orders. The policy leaves families and lawyers unable to find some people in custody through the federal locator or direct inquiries, the plaintiffs say.

The groups want the court to vacate the policy. Their lawyers said they would soon seek a stay while the case proceeds. At issue are hidden locations for people facing removal.

The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. It challenges a September change affecting people with final removal orders, not every person held in detention.

The four plaintiffs are:

• Greater Boston Legal Services
• Rian Immigrant Center
• Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project
• Amica Center for Immigrant Rights

Four legal services groups filed in Massachusetts

The case, Greater Boston Legal Services et al. v. Mullin, was brought on the organizations’ behalf by the National Immigration Law Center, National Immigration Project, American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts and Annelise Araujo Law.

The plaintiffs say the government stopped providing locations through the Online Detainee Locator System and stopped responding to location requests from relatives and attorneys. The change affects people with final removal orders.

The locator had made detainee locations available for more than 16 years, according to the groups. Families and lawyers used it to follow people as they moved between detention facilities. The groups say the new restriction makes it harder to communicate with clients and potential clients.

A lawsuit filed in federal court in Boston says the exclusion affects more than 20,000 people, about 30 percent of all detainees. The Department of Homeland Security says detained people have several ways to communicate. The department has also said it is prioritizing removal of people with final orders.

The policy blocks location searches for people with final orders

The groups say lawyers have spent more time trying to find clients and prospective clients since the change. Calls to the agency’s detention information line can bring long holds, dropped calls, little information or no response, the complaint says. Some lawyers have tried using a program that schedules legal calls, but the groups say only a small share of detention centers use it.

The complaint says the difficulty has led to delayed or missed filings and fewer cases taken by legal services groups. Some legal remedies must be pursued before deportation. The organizations argue that people who cannot reach counsel or a court may lose the chance to seek those remedies in time.

A separate case involving Ann Lawani illustrates the problem, though it is not part of the Massachusetts lawsuit. Her family and lawyer could not locate her in the database after federal agents detained her at her California home on September 16, 2026. Her family later heard from her in Louisiana.

Lawani’s attorney, Natalia Vieira Santanna, described how the search differed from her usual work:

“That’s usually simple,” said her lawyer, Natalia Vieira Santanna. “In Ann’s case, it wasn’t, because nobody would tell us where she was.”

The groups allege three legal violations and seek a stay

The complaint argues that the policy violates the Administrative Procedure Act because the government adopted it without explanation. It also alleges that the restriction violates the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights by interfering with lawyers’ ability to advise people about their rights and seek prospective clients.

The groups additionally allege a violation of the Freedom of Information Act, saying the government failed to publish details of the policy. Those are claims in the lawsuit, not findings by the court. The plaintiffs ask the court to vacate the policy.

On October 28, counsel said the groups would shortly file a motion to stay the policy while the case continues. The Massachusetts court’s status on the requested relief remains unclear.

The National Immigration Law Center’s case page is the place to watch for developments on the stay motion. The groups have not described that motion as filed.

This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.