Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration Policy of Fining Migrants Up to $1.8 Million

By John W. Lawit and Madeline Carles, Paralegal Intern 

Authors’ Note: John W. Lawit is an attorney at law. Madeline Carles is a paralegal intern, not a practicing attorney. This article is written for educational purposes and informational purposes, and does not constitute legal advice.

Key Summary:

• A U.S. District judge in Boston temporarily blocked a Trump administration rule that fast-tracked massive civil penalties for migrants failing to leave the country after receiving final deportation orders.
• The frozen policy allowed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to issue fines of up to $998 per day, which could accumulate to roughly $1.8 million per person over a five-year statutory limit.
• The court determined the administration likely violated the Administrative Procedure Act by skipping required public consultation periods, rejecting government claims that the rule was exempt.

Massive Civil Penalties Temporarily Halted

On September 30, 2026, U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr. in Boston issued a ruling that freezes the Trump administration’s streamlined process for assessing and collecting exorbitant civil fines from undocumented migrants. Under the June 2025 rule, the administration targeted individuals who remained in the U.S. after being issued final orders of removal with penalties reaching $998 for each day they stayed. Because federal law allows the government to enforce these civil fines for up to five years, a single penalty could culminate in approximately $1.8 million per person.

The lawsuit—brought forward by two immigrants alongside the Immigrant Legal Resource Center—argued that these severe financial penalties were improperly implemented and caused severe emotional and financial distress. In his ruling, Judge O’Toole agreed that the administration’s fast-tracked process violated federal rulemaking laws by denying the public an opportunity to review and comment. DHS attempted to justify bypassing this public consultation by claiming the rule touched on foreign affairs and merely altered internal government procedures, but the judge firmly rejected both of these exemptions.

Ongoing Legal Proceedings and Alternative Enforcement

While this order provides crucial relief by freezing the expedited fines, it is important to note that the ruling is a temporary stay during the ongoing lawsuit, not a permanent cancellation of the underlying financial penalties.

Immigrants facing final removal orders or those who have overstayed a voluntary departure date remain subject to other enforcement actions. Cases may still be affected by:

• DHS opted to utilize its older, pre-2025 procedural frameworks to assess and issue financial penalties while the new rule is frozen.
• The potential reactivation of the frozen fines if the government successfully appeals the judge’s order or wins the final lawsuit.
• Separate statutory consequences that remain entirely unaffected, such as the 10-year bar on adjusting legal status for individuals who overstay voluntary departure dates.
• Distinct legal fees, such as a separate $5,000 minimum penalty for individuals who are ordered removed at a missed immigration hearing and are subsequently arrested by ICE.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws and policies can change, and individuals should consult with a qualified immigration attorney regarding their specific circumstances. If you have questions, please call John W. Lawit, LLC at 214-609-2242.