ACLU Sues Hartford Immigration Court Over Withheld Case

The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut sued U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and Chief Immigration Judge Angela Munson on Wednesday. The lawsuit demands access to case records from the Hartford Immigration Court for proceedings held between May 2026 and July 2026.

The ACLU-CT says officials withheld basic records after two formal requests went unanswered. The group seeks docket numbers, case captions, and the orders issued when individuals missed their hearings.

Dan Barrett, legal director for the ACLU of Connecticut, argued that public attendance at hearings is impractical for understanding the court's broader operations. "while the public can attend court hearings and see the day’s docket, that is not a practical way for people to access that information and get a broad picture of what’s going on," Barrett said.

The lawsuit asks a federal district court to recognize a First Amendment right of public access to these materials. It also seeks an order preventing the officials from blocking the requests. The ACLU contends this constitutional right exists separately from the Freedom of Information Act process.

Complaint Links Records to High Removal Order Rate

Data cited in the complaint, originally requested by the Deportation Data Project, reveals a stark pattern in the Hartford court. More than 99.8% of cases decided with in absentia rulings this year ended in a removal order.

The in absentia designation applied to a large majority of the court's caseload. More than 79% of all cases from January 1 through August 1 were marked in absentia.

An in absentia decision occurs when an individual fails to appear for a scheduled hearing. The ACLU argues that accessing the specific orders from these cases is key for public oversight. The requested docket numbers and case captions would allow the public to identify specific proceedings within the three-month period.

Published EOIR Data Lacks Specific Court Records

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), a division of the Department of Justice, already publishes case-level datasets. These datasets contain several categories of information below.

However, these datasets do not include the specific records requested in the lawsuit. The ACLU is seeking docket numbers, case captions, and the actual orders issued, which are not part of the published EOIR data.

Privacy restrictions are a central part of the dispute. Barrett noted that full names are "not normally provided via FOIA" and are usually denied on privacy grounds. The ACLU's lawsuit contends the First Amendment provides a separate, stronger basis for access to the case captions, which contain information not easily assembled from a daily docket.

Senator Blumenthal Describes Courtroom 'Chaos'

U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal visited the Hartford Immigration Court on Tuesday, the day before the lawsuit was filed. He described witnessing "purposeful chaos," citing severe understaffing and an overwhelming caseload.

Blumenthal reported that an administrative judge presided remotely and only one interpreter was available in the courtroom. He also stated that none of the individuals appearing before the judge had criminal records and that few had legal representation.

The senator sharply criticized the system's operation. "a system that is running amok and doing injustice, and it is intentional injustice, designed to deport as many people as possible as quickly as the system is able to do it, regardless of the merits of these cases," Blumenthal said.

His observations provide a separate, on-the-ground view of the court proceedings at the heart of the records dispute. The ACLU's lawsuit seeks the documents that would allow for external examination of these same proceedings.

The complaint asks the federal court to formally declare that the Immigration Court is bound by the First Amendment right of public access. A ruling would determine whether the ACLU can obtain the records for the May through July 2026 period under this legal theory.