ACLU-CT lawsuit alleges DOJ's Hartford immigration court withheld docket, removal-order data for months, blocking public oversight of removals
On September 9, 2026, the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut sued U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and Angela Munson, chief immigration judge of the Hartford, Connecticut immigration court, alleging the court had twice ignored requests for all docket numbers and case captions from May through July 2026 and all in-absentia removal orders issued in that window. ACLU-CT argues the First Amendment entitles the public to that information without going through a Freedom of Information Act request, which can take months and defeats near-real-time oversight of removal and in-absentia cases. The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.
Actors
- U.S. Department of Justice (Executive Office for Immigration Review / Hartford immigration court)
- Todd Blanche (Attorney General)
- Angela Munson (Chief Immigration Judge, Hartford immigration court)
On September 9, 2026, the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut sued U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and Angela Munson, chief immigration judge of the Hartford, Connecticut immigration court, alleging the court had withheld basic records from the public. According to the complaint, ACLU-CT twice requested all docket numbers and case captions for May through July 2026 court activity, plus all in-absentia removal orders issued in that window, and received no response to either request.
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut before Judge Vernon D. Oliver, seeks a declaration that the immigration court is bound by the First Amendment right of public access and an order barring Blanche and Munson from continuing to withhold the records. ACLU-CT argues this information should be available without going through the Freedom of Information Act process, which can take months and undercuts the purpose of near-real-time public oversight of what happens inside the courts — including in-absentia and third-country removals. ACLU-CT legal director Dan Barrett said that while the public can attend court hearings and see the day's docket, that is not a practical way to get a broad picture of case outcomes in aggregate.
A request for comment from the Department of Justice was not immediately returned, according to CT Mirror. The case has the potential to set precedent that could affect immigration-court records access elsewhere in the country, Barrett said.
Why we recorded this
Government transparency depends on the public being able to see what is happening inside courts that decide removal cases, not just attend hearings in person or wait months for a records request. According to a First Amendment lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Connecticut, the Hartford immigration court twice failed to respond to requests for docket numbers, case captions, and in-absentia removal orders spanning May through July 2026. This archive records the alleged sustained non-response because withholding routine docket data delays the kind of near-real-time public oversight that surfaces problems in individual removal and in-absentia cases before they compound.
Sources
- ACLU lawsuit seeks release of Hartford immigration court data — CT Mirror secondary accessed September 12, 2026
- ACLU lawsuit seeks release of Hartford, Connecticut immigration court data — Chron.com (AP) secondary accessed September 12, 2026
- American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut v. Blanche et al, 3:2026cv01458 — Justia (U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut docket) primary accessed September 12, 2026
See also
- Justice Department refused a federal judge's order to justify Epstein-file redactions, moving to delay or dissolve it
- Attorney General Blanche refused to pledge DOJ independence from White House, said Trump's views can factor into prosecutions
- DOJ scrubs Jan. 6 prosecution releases, erasing records of pleas and convictions
- DOJ withheld and removed Epstein-file records tied to a Trump sexual-abuse allegation
- DOJ refused judge's order to confirm termination of $1.8B 'anti-weaponization fund'
Receive the daily digest by email
One email each morning with every entry filed the day before. Free. No tracking, no ads. Unsubscribe anytime.
