Lou's Views: Courthouses Should Deliver Justice, Not Fear

On the morning of August 8, 2025, Steven Rony Reyes walked into the criminal courthouse in downtown Los Angeles to attend his preliminary hearing, which occurs in the early stages of a case. For many, the courthouse stands as a symbol of fairness and due process. But for Reyes, that expectation was shattered. As he exited the building, plainclothes ICE agents surrounded him on the courthouse steps, swiftly placing him into immigration custody. The arrest was not only public and abrupt, it was emblematic of a deeper threat to justice itself.

A spokesman for the district attorney’s office said they had no advance information about ICE’s action and declined to comment further. In the past, L.A. County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman said he would prefer if federal immigration agents would wait to act until after the completion of state-level prosecutions. That preference reflects a simple principle: criminal matters should be resolved in court before immigration enforcement intervenes.

The concerns over courthouse arrests are not new. “Federal immigration enforcement activities inside courthouses disrupt court operations, breach public trust, and compromise the Court’s constitutional role as a neutral venue for the peaceful resolution of disputes,” L.A. County Presiding Justice Sergio C. Tapia II said in a statement in June. “These actions create a chilling effect, silencing victims, deterring witnesses, discouraging community members from seeking protection and deterring parties from being held accountable for their crimes or participating in legal proceedings critical to the rule of law.”

Courthouse arrests like this one reverberate far beyond the individual. They send a chilling message to entire communities: attending court, even as a defendant, can lead to detention and deportation. When noncitizen individuals fear that stepping into a courthouse could result in immigration custody, they may avoid hearings altogether—leading to bench warrants, increased bail, and a breakdown of fair adjudication. Victims and witnesses, too, may remain silent.

If courthouses are perceived as unsafe, vital evidence—and the willingness to come forward—vanishes. This doesn’t just affect immigrants; it harms public safety and the rule of law. Moreover, when trust erodes, the entire criminal justice system falters: cases collapse, offenders walk free, and communities lose faith in the courts’ ability to deliver justice.

The United States rightly enforces its immigration laws, and ICE has a defined role in that enforcement. But arresting someone on courthouse steps is a blunt, destructive tactic—one that undermines the justice system those laws are meant to protect. There are more thoughtful, effective alternatives. ICE should coordinate with criminal courts to allow defendants to resolve state-level matters before initiating immigration custody. Enforcement can be carried out in less disruptive locations—courthouses should be treated as zones of due process, not fear-inducing ambush sites.

When law enforcement tactics discourage individuals from seeking justice, they corrode trust in our courts, and do more harm than good. When I was a young public defender, I recall a judge telling my client who voluntarily came to court to address a warrant, “if you walk in, then you walk out.” The client was grateful for being treated with dignity and for knowing that the courthouse was a place to resolve matters, not a trap. That promise—that walking in to seek justice means you can walk out without fear—is what keeps our justice system functioning. Immigration laws must be enforced, but never at the expense of the integrity of our justice system.

Lou Shapiro is a criminal defense attorney-certified specialist and legal analyst, but most importantly, makes the end-of-shul announcements at Adas Torah.

He can be reached at LouisJShapiro@gmail.com.