Judge asks how DHS funds new lawmaker visit policy

Ryan Tarinelli, CQ-Roll Call on Jan 14, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

WASHINGTON — A federal judge appeared open to siding with House Democrats at a hearing Wednesday over a new Department of Homeland Security guidance restricting congressional oversight visits to immigration detention facilities.

Judge Jia M. Cobb of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia pressed for answers over how the Trump administration is funding the implementation of the guidance that includes a seven-day wait period for lawmakers to gain access to immigration facilities. Attorneys for lawmakers say that’s a brazen attempt to sidestep a provision in appropriations law, Section 527, that allows lawmakers to make unannounced visits to immigration detention facilities.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem wrote in the newest guidance that the funding is coming from the reconciliation law that President Donald Trump signed on July 4, which she refers to as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Lawyers for the House members had asked Cobb to seek clarity from DHS on why the newest guidance doesn’t violate Section 527, saying “it is practically impossible” that the development and implementation of the policy has been done “without using a single dollar of annually appropriated funds subject to section 527.” Cobb, at the hearing Wednesday, asked the Justice Department whether such funds have been used to implement the policy.

Justice Department attorney Amber Richer told the court she didn’t have all of that information. But Richer added that DOJ could make a filing later addressing whether any annually appropriated funds were used to promulgate or enforce the guidance.

On Wednesday, attorneys on both sides zeroed in on a new declaration from DHS official Holly C. Mehringer. She said the department can track the costs associated with the newer policy and “can adjust its accounting ledgers” to ensure those costs are applied to reconciliation funds and not annual appropriations.

“To the extent that the obligations for these costs would ordinarily be recorded against the Department’s annual appropriations, the Department can adjust its accounting ledgers so that they are properly recorded against H.R. 1 appropriations,” the declaration read.

An attorney for the House lawmakers dismissed arguments that DHS could adjust the ledger on the back end, saying the appropriations law applies the moment those funds are spent.

Cobb said she was simply trying to determine whether there was a violation of her previous order. Cobb ended the Wednesday hearing without ruling on the issue.

Last month, the judge sided with Democratic lawmakers in an opinion that found a previous Trump administration policy, which was first announced last June, was likely contrary to appropriations law because it in effect required lawmakers to provide a seven-day notice before making a visit.