Brianne Gorod is chief counsel for the Constitutional Accountability Center, one of the groups representing ASISTA. She said that, based on time limits established in the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, the president has exhausted his legal authority to place temporary, acting directors at the helm of ICE.
Rule of Law
Advocates In Conn. Sue ICE, Claiming Agency’s Acting-Director Is Serving Illegally
A lawsuit filed Thursday in Connecticut’s U.S. District Court alleges the Trump administration’s acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Matthew Albence, is illegally serving in that position and, therefore, some enforcement changes enacted under his authority are unlawful.
Lawyers on behalf of Suffield, Conn., based-ASISTA Immigration Assistance say federal law requires the director of ICE be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. It’s been more than three years since the agency was led by a Senate-confirmed director.
“Matthew Albence was not allowed to be acting director of ICE after August 1, 2019, based on the explicit limits set out in the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. But, not withstanding that, he continued purporting to be the acting director of ICE and he continued taking official actions under the authority of that office,” Gorod said.
According to the reform act, the office of ICE director can be filled by an acting official for up to 210 days after a presidential nomination is either rejected, withdrawn or returned by the Senate. This 210-day extension may be applied twice before mandating a permanent, Senate-confirmed leader take the helm of the agency. The second extension period ended on August 1, 2019, while Albence continued to serve as an acting director, a position he holds today.
A spokesperson for ICE declined to comment on the suit.
The suit specifically challenges a revision announced by ICE on Aug. 2, 2019, which alters the way U visa applicants request protection from deportation. Some victims of crime who are in the U.S. without proper documentation and cooperate with law enforcement investigations are able to apply for legal status in the country through the U visa program. But advocates say the wait is often years long and applicants generally are not safe from removal proceedings during that time period.
###
More from Rule of Law
April 15, 2026
February 25, 2026
Court to contemplate SEC’s use of disgorgement in securities enforcement
CAC's amici brief on behalf of legal scholars in Sripetch v. SEC was featured in SCOTUSblog. Read more...
April 14, 2026
CAC Release: Failing to Enforce Subpoena of Bondi is Failing the American People
WASHINGTON, DC – In response to the unexplained cancellation of Pam Bondi’s scheduled deposition, Constitutional...
April 2, 2026
Consumer Groups Back SEC In High Court Disgorgement Row
CAC Legal Fellow Simon Chin discussed CAC's amici brief on behalf of legal scholars in Sripetch...
U.S. Supreme Court
Sripetch v. Securities and Exchange Commission
In Sripetch v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Supreme Court is considering whether a showing of pecuniary harm to investors is a prerequisite to an award of disgorgement in a civil action brought by the...
April 30, 2026
13th Annual Home Stretch at the Supreme Court
CAC Release: Supreme Court Oral Argument Focuses on Takings Clause, While Largely Ignoring the Problematic Excessive-Fines-Clause Analysis Applied by the Court Below
WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Pung v....