WASHINGTON — House Democrats again asked a federal judge to block the latest policy from the Department of Homeland Security requiring a seven-day notice for members of Congress to visit immigration detention facilities to conduct oversight visits.

The request for a temporary restraining order was filed Monday with more than a dozen sworn declarations from members of Congress on experiences they have had with restrictions on oversight visits and the importance of those visits to informing their work.

The lawmakers have gone several legal rounds with DHS over limitations, but the latest request comes as scrutiny over the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement is at an all-time high after clashes with the public in Minnesota and immigration agents fatally shooting two U.S. citizens.

The filing calls the latest version of the DHS visitation policy, issued Jan. 8 without public notice and discovered when lawmakers were blocked from conducting an oversight visit at Minnesota detention facilities, the “latest transparent attempt to subvert Congress’ will and shroud its facilities in secrecy.”

“The information that this oversight would provide is more crucial than ever, and Plaintiffs are irreparably harmed every day that this information, and access to detention facilities, is lost to them,” the filing states.

Lawmakers had initially filed the lawsuit in July seeking a court order against DHS policy restricting after their visits. Judge Jia M. Cobb of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia temporarily blocked the policy in December, finding it was likely “contrary to law and in excess of DHS’s statutory authority.”

In part, she found the lawmakers likely would succeed on their claims that the limitations violated Section 527 of a fiscal 2025 appropriations law, which grants members of Congress authority to make unannounced visits to immigration detention facilities.

The Homeland Security portion of a multibill spending package the Senate plans to take up this week includes the same language to allow lawmakers immediate access to immigration detention facilities to conduct oversight.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, in the newest policy, said all funding for the lawmaker visits will not come from congressional appropriations, but from separate funds in a budget reconciliation law President Donald Trump signed in July.

That reconciliation law provided $170 billion for immigration enforcement activities, including $45 billion to DHS specifically for expanding immigration sites.

“Unannounced visits require pulling ICE officers away from their normal duties,” Noem wrote. “Moreover, there is an increasing trend of replacing legitimate oversight activities with circus-like publicity stunts, all of which creates a chaotic environment with heightened emotions.”

The lawmakers, in their filing Monday, argue that their visits are essential because many of them contribute to legislation related to oversight of the immigration detention centers.

“Many Plaintiffs are leaders or members of committees with jurisdiction over DHS and ICE, or related issues, and over appropriations for those agencies,” the filing states. “Timely and accurate information regarding those agencies’ activities is imperative to their committee work.”

The filing also argues the memo is arbitrary because it requires a “minimum” of seven days of notice for congressional visitation and doesn’t necessarily grant access to lawmakers at the end of that period.

Rep. April McClain Delaney of Maryland, the filing cities as an example, requested on Dec. 11 to visit a Baltimore ICE facility. Immigration and Custom Enforcement, the filing states, acknowledged the request six days later, and gave her a date to come more than a month later.

But that visit was canceled days before it was to take place and is now scheduled for Tuesday — 47 days after her office made the request, the filing states.

Rep. Joe Neguse of Colorado, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, wrote in a declaration that limited access to immigration detention facilities is insufficient because internal reporting within DHS on conditions within facilities “is often inadequate and incomplete.”

“I conducted a visit at the Aurora facility on August 11, 2025, but the facility was on a lockdown for a population count during the tour. ICE officials were unable to answer several basic questions about the facility,” Neguse wrote.

“On August 22, 2025, other Members and I sent ICE a letter about this visit and sought information regarding conditions of detention and facility operations. Over 150 days later, we still have not received a response,” he said.

The lawmakers previously asked the judge to block the latest policy, but Cobb ruled that they used the wrong procedure.

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