Federal judge blocks DHS civil fines on migrants who ignored removal orders
U.S. District Judge George O'Toole Jr. in Boston granted preliminary relief against the Department of Homeland Security's civil fines on immigrants who did not leave after removal orders, finding the process likely broke federal law. Outlets differ on the ruling date and on how many fines have been issued.
1 / 2
The story, neutrally told
Mixed · 2U.S. District Judge George O'Toole Jr., a Clinton appointee sitting in Boston, has blocked the Trump administration's civil fines on immigrants who did not leave the country after final removal orders. Raw StoryL “U.S. District Judge George O'Toole Jr., an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, granted a stay” Read at Raw Story ↗ Fox NewsR “U.S. District Judge George O'Toole in Boston issued the ruling” Read at Fox News ↗ Mixed · 2Raw Story says the stay applies to a June 2025 DHS rule meant to speed up the fines and to ICE's practice of issuing them in bulk. Fox News dates the change to July 2025, when DHS and the Justice Department dropped a 30-day notice period and shortened the process for challenging penalties. Raw StoryL “granted a stay Wednesday against a June 2025 rule that let DHS rush out fines for failing to leave the country” Read at Raw Story ↗ Fox NewsR “In July 2025, DHS and the Department of Justice implemented changes aimed at streamlining the assessment of fines by scrapping a 30-day notice period” Read at Fox News ↗ Mixed · 2The case is a class-action suit brought by two plaintiffs. Fox News says it was filed last year. Nancy M. was fined more than $1.8 million, and Maria L., a nail technician, was fined hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to Raw Story. Fox NewsR “in response to a class-action lawsuit filed last year by two of the thousands of migrants” Read at Fox News ↗ Raw StoryL “Maria L., a nail technician, was fined hundreds of thousands of dollars while pursuing legal status.” Read at Raw Story ↗
Left · 1The judge found the government likely violated the law. The two statutes apply only to people who willfully ignore a removal order or voluntarily skip a departure deadline. Raw Story reports that under the rule, staying in the country after an order creates an assumed violation and shifts the burden to the recipient, and that the newer ICE forms are boilerplate checkboxes that do not explain why conduct was deemed willful. Raw StoryL “The two statutes behind the fines apply only when someone willfully ignores a removal order or voluntarily skips a departure deadline.”“The newer ICE forms are boilerplate checkboxes with no explanation of why anyone's conduct was deemed willful” Read at Raw Story ↗ Mixed · 2O'Toole also found the administration likely violated the Administrative Procedure Act by not offering public comment before the change. He rejected the government's argument that the foreign affairs and procedural exceptions applied. Raw StoryL “He rejected the government's claims that the rule fell under the foreign affairs and procedural exceptions” Read at Raw Story ↗ Fox NewsR “it did not offer the public a chance to first comment on the policy change” Read at Fox News ↗ Left · 1Raw Story reports that the rule scrapped advance warning of a fine and cut the appeal window from 30 days to 15, which the judge called "essentially punitive". Raw StoryL “cut the appeal window from 30 days to 15, a change the judge called "essentially punitive"” Read at Raw Story ↗
Mixed · 2On harm, the judge wrote that the plaintiffs live in an "economically precarious position" and face wage garnishment, loss of vehicles and homes and federal collection suits. He said vacating the fines later might not make them whole. Raw Story adds that he found a stay costs the government little, because it can still pursue fines under the old procedures. Fox NewsR “They face the possible garnishment of their already modest wages, loss of any vehicles and homes, federal collections lawsuits” Read at Fox News ↗ Raw StoryL “Because the government can still pursue fines under the old procedures, he said, a stay costs it little.” Read at Raw Story ↗ Mixed · 2The reports differ on the scale of the program and the ruling date. Raw Story cites more than 65,000 penalties worth roughly $36 billion, saying the agency has "reportedly" issued them. Fox News cites a DHS statement from July of more than 103,000 fines totalling about $84 billion. Raw Story says the ruling came on a Wednesday, while Fox News says Monday. Raw StoryL “The agency has reportedly handed out more than 65,000 penalties worth roughly $36 billion.” Read at Raw Story ↗ Fox NewsR “DHS said it had issued more than 103,000 fines to migrants totaling about $84 billion”“issued the ruling on Monday” Read at Fox News ↗ Right · 1DHS has defended the fines, saying people who refuse to leave after a final removal order could face $998 per day. Fox News says they have been applied retroactively for up to five years, with a $1.8 million maximum. Fox News reached out to DHS for comment on the ruling. Senators Alex Padilla and Dick Durbin, both Democrats, had urged DHS and the Justice Department to pause what they called the "improper application" of the penalties. Fox NewsR “DHS has defended the penalties, saying people who refuse to leave the country after receiving a final order of removal could face fines of $998 per day.”“The fines have been imposed retroactively for up to five years, with a maximum penalty of $1.8 million.”“Sens. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., urged DHS and DOJ to pause the "improper application of certain civil penalties"” Read at Fox News ↗
Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.
Left1 outlet
- Framing
- Presents the ruling as another legal setback for Trump and the program as a 'punitive' fine machine, with detail on the legal reasoning.
- Emphasis
- The judge's legal findings, the burden shift to recipients, the 15-day appeal window, bulk issuance and the plaintiffs' circumstances.
- Leaves out or plays down
- No DHS defence of the fines and no mention of the $998 daily rate or the Padilla and Durbin letter.
- Charged language
- “another legal blow”“punitive”“fine machine”
- For example
-
“Trump suffers another legal blow as judge freezes $36 billion 'punitive' fine machine” — Raw Story
Centre0 outlets
No centre outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.
Right1 outlet
- Framing
- Reports the block in a straight news style, leading with the fine ceiling of $1.8 million, and includes DHS's defence and background on the program.
- Emphasis
- The judge's quotes on economic hardship, the larger DHS figures of 103,000 fines and $84 billion, the $998 daily fine and the history of the statute.
- Leaves out or plays down
- Less on the burden-shifting reasoning and the cut in the appeal window. Does not say whether DHS responded to the ruling.
- Charged language
- “illegal immigrants”“exorbitant fines”
- For example
-
“DHS has defended the penalties, saying people who refuse to leave the country after receiving a final order of removal could face fines of $998 per day.” — Fox News
What every side reports
- Judge George O'Toole Jr., a Clinton appointee, ruled against DHS's immigration civil fines.
- The suit was brought by two plaintiffs, one of them Nancy M., who was fined more than $1.8 million.
- The judge found the process likely violated the Administrative Procedure Act by skipping public comment, and that fine notices did not show conduct was willful.
- The judge said the plaintiffs could be pushed into insolvency by garnishment and loss of property.
Where accounts differ
-
Number and value of fines issued
- Left
- More than 65,000 penalties worth roughly $36 billion, reportedly.
- Right
- DHS said in July it had issued more than 103,000 fines totalling about $84 billion.
-
Date of the ruling
- Left
- Says a Wednesday.
- Right
- Says Monday.
-
Date of the DHS rule change
- Left
- June 2025 rule.
- Right
- July 2025 changes.
Department of Homeland Security organisation
DHS has defended the penalties, saying people who ignore final removal orders can be fined $998 per day. Fox News reports it reached out to DHS for comment on the ruling.
“DHS has defended the penalties, saying people who refuse to leave the country after receiving a final order of removal could face fines of $998 per day.” — Fox News
Donald Trump person
Raw Story casts the ruling as a legal setback for Trump's administration. Fox News describes the fines as imposed under the Trump administration since January 2025.
“Trump suffers another legal blow” — Raw Story
“since President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025” — Fox News
Left1 article
-
Trump suffers another legal blow as judge freezes $36 billion 'punitive' fine machine
Critical Treats the fines as an overreaching program that the judge found likely unlawful, and the ruling as a setback for Trump.

Centre0 articles
No coverage yet.
Right1 article
-
Federal judge blocks Trump administration fines of up to $1.8M for migrants
Neutral Straight news account of the ruling, with the judge's words, DHS's defence and the program's background.

- 6 Oct 01:43 First Raw StoryL Trump suffers another legal blow as judge freezes $36 billion 'punitive' fine machine
- 7 Oct 07:44 +30h Fox NewsR Federal judge blocks Trump administration fines of up to $1.8M for migrants
Times are when each article was published, or when we first saw it if the outlet gave no time.