Soumare, et al. v. Rife, et al.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, Handley Farah & Anderson PLLC, Langer Grogan & Diver, P.C., and the Robert & Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center filed a federal class action lawsuit against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Philadelphia Field Office and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) challenging the field office’s abandonment of its longstanding Changed Circumstances Policy as a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

For decades, the federal government has allowed immigrants who do not pose a danger to the community or a flight risk to remain out of custody during ongoing removal proceedings if they comply with their conditions of release. Consistent with the federal statutory and regulatory scheme, legal precedent, DHS policy, and the U.S. Constitution, the Philadelphia ICE Field Office adopted and followed the Changed Circumstances Policy. The policy required officers to justify re-arrest and re-detention by first making an individualized determination of a material change in circumstances, such as an indication of new danger or flight risk. In 2025, without any reasonable explanation, they suddenly abandoned this policy. This shift has since induced distress and anxiety throughout the community, as ICE officers re-detain individuals at routine check-ins, who are still in full compliance with all conditions of their release and have no material change in their circumstances.

The lawsuit is being brought in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on behalf of three immigrant community members who — individually and as part of a class and subclass of people in similar circumstances — face the threat of re-detention without legal basis. In addition to the ICE field office rescinding its policy unlawfully under the APA, the ACLU-PA and co-counsel contend that re-detaining people in this manner is contrary to guarantees of due process and protections against unreasonable seizures found in the Constitution.

Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the members of the proposed classes, are requesting that the court declare that the rescission of the Changed Circumstances Policy is unlawful and provide relief that protects the rights of class members.