logo
ICE Lawyers Are Hiding Their Names in Immigration Court

ICE Lawyers Are Hiding Their Names in Immigration Court

The Intercept15-07-2025
Inside a federal immigration courtroom in New York City last month, a judge took an exceedingly unusual step: declining to state the name of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorney pressing to deport asylum seekers.
'We're not really doing names publicly,' said Judge ShaSha Xu — after stating her own name and those of the immigrants and their lawyers. It was the first of two separate instances The Intercept identified in which judges chose to withhold the identities of the attorneys representing the Trump administration's deportation regime.
As ICE agents across the country wear masks to raid workplaces and detain immigrants, government attorneys need not cover their faces to shield their identities. Legal experts who spoke to The Intercept agreed the practice of concealing the lawyers' identities was both novel and concerning.
'I've never heard of someone in open court not being identified,' said Elissa Steglich, a law professor and co-director of the Immigration Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin. 'Part of the court's ethical obligation is transparency, including clear identification of the parties. Not identifying an attorney for the government means if there are unethical or professional concerns regarding [the Department of Homeland Security], the individual cannot be held accountable. And it makes the judge appear partial to the government.'
'Part of the court's ethical obligation is transparency, including clear identification of the parties.'
The concealment shocked two lawyers who were representing immigrants in Xu's courtroom. Attorney Jeffrey Okun, who was representing a client via video call, characterized the move as 'bizarre.' Attorney Hugo Gonzalez Venegas called Xu's behavior 'a terrible lack of transparency on the part of officers of the court.'
Immigration courts, which are run by the Executive Office for Immigration Review — part of the executive branch, not the judiciary — are far less transparent than most courts. Their prosecutors work for ICE and DHS; they have no obligation to provide defense lawyers; and their judges are appointed — and fired — by the president.
On a Tuesday morning in late June, Xu was running through several brief, preliminary hearings known as 'master calendars.' Nationwide, these proceedings always start out the same way. An immigrant will appear with their attorney — if they have the good fortune to retain one — often on Webex. A judge presides at a big desk in an actual courtroom, in this case in lower Manhattan. An ICE lawyer represents the government in its attempts to deport the immigrant.
As each case commences, the judge recites their own name, followed by the immigrant's name, the name of the immigrant's attorney (if they have one), and finally, the name of the ICE lawyer. It's an on-the-record census that enables due process.
When Xu omitted the ICE lawyer's name, Okun asked her to identify who was arguing to deport his client. She refused.
Xu attributed the change to 'privacy' because 'things lately have changed.' Xu told Okun that he could use Webex's direct messaging function to send the ICE lawyer his email, and the ICE lawyer would probably respond with her own name and address. Okun accepted the arrangement.
When the next case commenced minutes later, Xu again refused to state the ICE lawyer's name, and Gonzalez Venegas, also on Webex, argued that the legal record would be incomplete without it. Xu again said that the two attorneys could message each other confidentially.
The government's mystery attorney, who was prosecuting both Okun's and Gonzalez-Venegas's clients, wore glasses and a navy blue suit; her hair was pulled back primly from her face. She spoke quietly, with a tinge of vocal fry. Her name, according to Gonzalez Venegas, was Cosette Shachnow.
Shachnow, 33, began working for ICE in 2021, shortly after she graduated from law school, according to public records and her LinkedIn account. The latter lists 'Civil Rights and Social Action' among her 'favored causes.'
Shachnow did not respond to an email from The Intercept seeking comment. Neither did the Executive Office for Immigration Review and the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, which oversees ICE lawyers.
It is unclear how many immigration judges are failing to say ICE lawyers' names, but The Intercept has witnessed the practice twice. On July 10, Judge James McCarthy in lower Manhattan neglected to identify the government's attorney in several cases, referring to the lawyer instead as 'Department.'
'Department, are we done with pleadings?' McCarthy asked. The word stood in for ICE's parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security. Several immigration defense attorneys were attending the hearings by video. None objected.
Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael, who is also a New York City immigration judge, told The Intercept that the new phenomenon of occluding ICE attorneys' names has not been formalized via a directive or rule. 'It's up to the judges whether or not they want to do it,' she said.
'This is a very new and very disturbing turn of events,' said Daniel Kowalski, a former longtime immigration attorney who now edits the legal journal Bender's Immigration Bulletin for LexisNexis.
'Where does it stop?' asked Kowalski. 'Are the immigration judges going to be unnamed? Behind a screen?'
Lazare-Raphael said she had heard that some ICE attorneys have said they found it 'dangerous to state their names publicly.'
That reasoning echoes DHS's questionable claim that ICE agents need to mask up because of what the department described as an almost 700 percent increase in assaults against agents nationally during the first six months of this year. But as DHS revealed last week, the raw number of assaults this year is 79, compared to 10 in the same period last year. Given that ICE arrests have more than quadrupled since Trump took office — and the agency's determination of what qualifies as an assault is often dubious — this uptick likely sounds more dramatic than it is.
Read Our Complete Coverage
Veronica Cardenas, who was an ICE prosecutor for six years before quitting in 2023, told The Intercept that she thinks the real threat these lawyers face is shame. She said that her mother came to the United States from Colombia without papers and was arrested at the southern border, and that while she was proud of her daughter when she started working for ICE, Cardenas came to realize the people she was seeking to deport were a lot like her family. Cardenas now works as an immigration defense attorney and counsels other ICE lawyers who want to leave their jobs — many of whom, she said, have backgrounds similar to hers.
Adam Boyd, a former ICE attorney who resigned last month, according to a report in The Atlantic, said that many ICE lawyers feel frustrated about having to ask judges to dismiss cases so that ICE enforcement and removal officers can grab immigrants outside courtrooms and swell the Trump administration's deportation numbers. Boyd said he left after making what he called 'a moral decision.'
The asylum system has suffered a stunning collapse under President Donald Trump's second term. In the past six months, judges' denials of asylum have skyrocketed from rates of 62 to 80 percent — and immigration enforcement statistics expert Austin Kocher predicts that the figure could soon top out at 95 percent.
As the Trump administration orders ICE to ramp up its removal operations, hundreds of immigrants to the United States are being arrested and beaten by people with their faces covered and no proof of who they are. Now, they may not know the names of the attorneys making the case to deport them, either.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump administration's lawsuit over Chicago's sanctuary city policies tossed by federal judge
Trump administration's lawsuit over Chicago's sanctuary city policies tossed by federal judge

New York Post

time3 hours ago

  • New York Post

Trump administration's lawsuit over Chicago's sanctuary city policies tossed by federal judge

A federal judge on Friday dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit challenging sanctuary city policies in Chicago and the state of Illinois. The Justice Department sued Illinois, Cook County and the city of Chicago — along with several state and local officials, including Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker and Mayor Brandon Johnson — in February, arguing their sanctuary laws 'interfere' with Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) ability to arrest and deport illegal migrants. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, concluded that sanctuary policies — which prohibit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal authorities on immigration enforcement — are protected by the 10th Amendment. 6 Federal agents detain a protester attempting to block US ICE agents from entering a building housing an immigration court in Chicago, Ill. on June 16, 2025. REUTERS '[T]he Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants' decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law — a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by [federal immigration laws],' Jenkins wrote in her 64-page ruling. 'Finding that these same Policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment,' the judge continued. 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity — the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.' Jenkins also determined that the Trump administration lacked standing to sue the 'individual defendants' named in the case, such as Pritzker and Cook. She dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning the Trump administration may amend its complaint if it wishes to continue litigating the issue. In their lawsuit, the Trump administration singled out the Illinois Trust Act and Chicago's Welcoming City ordinance. 6 President Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House on July 25, 2025. Ron Sachs/CNP / The Trust Act declares that 'State law does not currently grant State or local law enforcement the authority to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' while the Welcoming City ordinance emphatically states, 'No agency or agent shall: arrest, detain or continue to detain a person solely on the belief that the person is not present legally in the United States.' Pritzker and Johnson celebrated the judge's ruling. 'Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court,' the governor wrote on X. 'Their case challenging the bipartisan TRUST Act was dismissed — unlike the President, we follow the law and listen to the courts.' 6 Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker speaks after a meeting in the governor's office in Chicago on April 7, 2023. Getty Images Meanwhile, Johnson tweeted that the ruling 'affirms what we have long known: that Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety.' 'Chicago cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration's reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,' the mayor added. 'Our city is safer when local law enforcement can focus on the needs of Chicagoans.' 6 Lindsay C. Jenkins, US district judge for the Northern District of Illinois nominee, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on Oct. 12, 2022. REUTERS 6 Protesters hold up a sign opposing President Trump outside Trump Tower in Chicago during a rally on Jan. 20, 2025. AP The ruling is a setback to the Trump administration, which earlier this week sued New York City and Mayor Eric Adams over Gotham's sanctuary city policies — similarly arguing that rules limiting the NYPD's and other law enforcement agencies' cooperation with federal immigration enforcement are unconstitutional. The move came after two illegal migrants allegedly shot an off-duty Customs and Border Protection officer in the face in a Manhattan park. Attorney General Pam Bondi filed suit against Chicago and the state of Illinois on her first day on the job at DOJ. 6 Federal agents hold back a protester during an ICE exercise outside an immigration court in Chicago on June 16, 2025. REUTERS Bondi teased that the lawsuit would be the first of several going after sanctuary policies in Democrat-run states and cities. 'If you are a leader of a state or local jurisdiction that obstructs or impedes federal law enforcement, you will be next,' Bondi said in February. The DOJ has since filed lawsuits against New York City, Los Angeles, Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Hoboken over sanctuary laws. The White House and DOJ did not immediately respond to The Post's requests for comment.

Federal judge tosses Trump administration's ‘sanctuary city' lawsuit against Illinois
Federal judge tosses Trump administration's ‘sanctuary city' lawsuit against Illinois

The Hill

time6 hours ago

  • The Hill

Federal judge tosses Trump administration's ‘sanctuary city' lawsuit against Illinois

A federal judge on Friday threw out a Trump administration lawsuit seeking to block sanctuary laws in Illinois that limit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration authorities. In her ruling, Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins said that the Tenth Amendment, which protects people from federal government overreach, shielded the decision of local law enforcement to avoid collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other immigration agencies. 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity—the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment,' Jenkins wrote of the suit, which named Illinois, Chicago and a series of local officials as defendants. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Illinois prevents local officials from providing immigration information 'not otherwise publicly available,' while Chicago bars them from responding to inquiries from ICE without a warrant. State officers are also barred from complying with immigration detainers. The Trump administration argued that the local laws were an 'intentional effort' to subvert federal immigration statutes and claimed that they facilitated the return of criminals to the public. Chicago was one of the first major fronts in the Trump administration's aggressive mass deportation campaign, with federal agents swarming the city in the weeks after the inauguration. The lawsuit was one of the first cases filed by the Trump administration against so-called sanctuary jurisdictions.

2 San Bernardino County medical center staffers charged with assaulting a federal officer
2 San Bernardino County medical center staffers charged with assaulting a federal officer

CBS News

time6 hours ago

  • CBS News

2 San Bernardino County medical center staffers charged with assaulting a federal officer

Two staff members at a San Bernardino County medical center have been charged with assaulting a federal officer and interfering with immigration enforcement duties, the U.S. Attorney's Office announced on Friday. The charges stem from a July 8 incident, when two U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers detained a man inside the Ontario Advanced Surgery Center, and staff members at the center allegedly interfered. Jose de Jesus Ortega, 38, of Highland, was arrested Friday morning, and at his Riverside courthouse appearance later in the day, he was released on $10,000 bond. According to the U.S. Attorney's Office, Danielle Nadine Davila, 33, of Corona, turned herself in on Friday. Ortega and Davila are charged with assaulting a federal officer and conspiracy to prevent by force and intimidation a federal officer from discharging their duties. United States Attorney Bill Essayli said in a news release that the man detained inside the surgery center was not a patient. "He ran inside for cover, and these defendants attempted to block his apprehension by assaulting our agents," he said. According to prosecutors, two ICE agents were conducting "roving immigration-related operations" in Ontario on July 8, wearing government-issued equipment, driving an unmarked government vehicle, as they were following a truck with three men inside. The truck allegedly made a "quick" turn into the surgery center's parking lot and, as officers approached the men, two of them ran off. The third man was "partially detained near the surgery center's front entrance before he resisted and pulled away, causing both him and the ICE officer to fall to the ground," the U.S. Attorney's Office wrote in a news release. Prosecutors said a staff member at the center "helped pull him away from the officer," and the man went inside the center, where he "was pursued by the ICE officer, who eventually stopped him." Ortega and Davila allegedly continued to interfere with the man's arrest, Davila by wedging herself between the officer and the man, pushing the officer, and saying, "Let him go" and "Get out." Ortega allegedly grabbed the officer's arm and his vest. Legal advocates held a news conference on Friday afternoon to denounce Ortega's arrest. Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice Deputy Director Lizbeth Abeln said Ortega stood up for justice during the July 8 incident. "What we are seeing and witnessing are federal agents weaponizing their authority to target community members who speak out. It is shameful, it is unlawful, and it will not go unchallenged," she said. Ortega is scheduled to appear in court on August 19 for his arraignment. If convicted, the two would face a maximum sentence of eight years in federal prison on the assault count and up to six years in federal prison on the conspiracy count.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store