Ninth Circuit Presses DOJ on Alleged ICE Quotas
Government pushes back on claims of numerical enforcement targets, says ICE actions based on law, not arrest metrics.
WASHINGTON — In a formal letter to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the Department of Justice has denied allegations that the Trump administration has set a daily arrest quota for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), following scrutiny from federal judges during oral arguments in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem.
The July 30 letter, submitted by Yaakov M. Roth, principal deputy assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s Civil Division, responds to questions posed by Judges Ronald Gould, Marsha Berzon and Lucy Koh Sung during a July 28 hearing in San Francisco. The court had pressed the government on claims made by the plaintiffs that ICE had been directed to make 3,000 arrests per day—an assertion rooted in public statements by a White House official earlier this year.
“Neither ICE leadership nor its field offices have been directed to meet any numerical quota or target for arrests, detentions, removals, field encounters, or any other operational activities,” Roth wrote, pushing back against plaintiffs’ reliance on a New York Post article quoting a White House adviser describing the 3,000 figure as a "goal."
MIGRANT INSIDER is sponsored by:
“That quotation may have been accurate,” the DOJ acknowledged, but maintained that “no such goal has been set as a matter of policy, and no such directive has been issued to or by DHS or ICE.”
The clarification comes amid heightened legal and public scrutiny of the Department of Homeland Security’s enforcement priorities, particularly under the administration of President Donald Trump, whose immigration approach has sparked a series of constitutional challenges. At issue in Vasquez Perdomo is a district court injunction that temporarily blocked certain ICE operations, based on claims the administration was using numerical arrest targets to drive removals—allegedly without individualized assessments.
The DOJ argued that enforcement activities remain grounded in law, not metrics. “Enforcement activity is firmly anchored in binding legal constraints—constitutional, statutory, and regulatory requirements that apply at every stage,” Roth wrote, noting that ICE uses “multiple layers of supervisory review” to ensure legal compliance.
The letter seeks to persuade the Ninth Circuit to lift the lower court’s injunction, which the DOJ says was “sweeping,” lacked evidentiary support, and denied the government a fair chance to rebut serious allegations. “Anonymous reports in the newspapers” should not be used to define policy, Roth added.
The Ninth Circuit has not yet ruled on whether to stay the injunction.
Impact on Immigrant Communities
While the DOJ insists ICE arrests are based on “individualized assessments,” immigrant advocates say the letter fails to address the real-world effects of enforcement surges in immigrant-heavy communities.
If the court upholds the injunction, it could mark a significant check on the federal government's ability to use informal targets or performance metrics in removal operations—an issue of particular relevance to international students, veterans, and long-term U.S. residents whose status may be jeopardized by criminal history or bureaucratic error.
MIGRANT INSIDER is sponsored by
Case Background
Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem stems from a class-action suit challenging recent DHS enforcement actions in California and Arizona, where plaintiffs allege that ICE officers were instructed to prioritize arrest numbers over legal standards. Plaintiffs claim such tactics violate both constitutional due process and statutory limits on DHS authority.
The case names South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem in her current capacity as DHS Secretary.
The Ninth Circuit’s forthcoming ruling will likely clarify the legal bounds of administrative discretion in immigration enforcement—especially critical during an election year when immigration remains a central policy and political flashpoint.
If you’ve made it this far, you care. Help us keep pressing the powerful and exposing what they’d rather you never see—subscribe or donate to keep Migrant Insider going.