Baton Rouge Immigration Court Enforces Ban on Public Access to Hearings
The Baton Rouge Immigration Court is under scrutiny for imposing a blanket order that prevents all nationals, including family members of immigrants, from attending private hearings. Court officials confirmed this decision to The Lens on Monday.
This policy is now the subject of an administrative complaint lodged with the U.S. Department of Justice, emphasizing the need for transparency in judicial proceedings.
While courts across the United States are typically open to the public, the Baton Rouge Immigration Court appears to have strayed from this norm. The complaint, filed on behalf of the advocacy group Misión Migrante and other concerned citizens, claims that the public has been repeatedly denied access to observe court proceedings, a right protected by law.
The complaint urges immediate action to reopen the courtroom for public access, highlighting that violations of this nature are reportedly more pronounced in Baton Rouge than in any other immigration court nationwide. Bill Quigley, an attorney emeritus at Loyola University, who is representing Misión Migrante’s leader, Rachel Taber, noted the severity of the situation after consulting with other legal experts and activists. “Some courts are consistently open, while others, like this one, are remarkably restrictive,” he stated.
On the day the complaint was filed, reporters from The Lens attempted to attend a hearing but were informed by a security guard that the judge had unilaterally decided to close the courtroom since its opening in October to protect individual privacy. “At the judge’s discretion, no one is allowed to participate in individual hearings,” the guard explained, adding that even family members must remain outside unless seating is available.
A court employee, who wished to remain anonymous, indicated that this closure directive originated from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in Alexandria, Virginia. The employee provided a printout from the Immigration Court Practice Manual, which included a highlighted provision stating that immigration judges can limit attendance to safeguard privacy, but noted that this rule has been applied excessively in Baton Rouge.
According to the complaint, Misión Migrante’s court monitoring volunteers have attempted to gain entry to hearings at the Baton Rouge courthouse over 50 times since October 2025, but were allowed attendance on only one occasion. Although they could attend master hearings six times, they were denied entry on seven other occasions, raising serious concerns about access to justice.
Quigley argued that these denials violate the U.S. Constitution, which mandates open access to court proceedings. “Public and press access is central to the First Amendment,” he stressed, asserting that citizens should have the right to information held by the courts, thus facilitating active participation in governance.
The closed sessions at the Baton Rouge courthouse also appear to contravene several federal regulations, including the Code of Federal Regulations and guidelines from the Department of Justice’s Office of Immigration Review. The Department’s website explicitly states that immigration court hearings are generally open to the public, permitting exceptions only under specific circumstances.
Despite the purported justification for closed sessions, Quigley noted that federal law allows for courtroom closures only under certain conditions, such as overcrowding or cases involving sensitive issues. “You can restrict access for legitimate reasons, but outright closure is not permissible,” he explained.
No responses have been received from either the Baton Rouge Immigration Court or the Office of Immigration Review regarding inquiries made by The Lens. Misión Migrante’s documentation supports claims of ongoing restrictions since the court opened. In one notable instance on October 20, 2025, a group was denied public access entirely, reinforcing concerns about transparency and accountability.
This week, Misión Migrante explicitly stated the urgency of public oversight in light of the current immigration enforcement climate. “Closing these courtrooms serves only to diminish accountability and increases the risk to thousands of lives,” the complaint asserts. “It is imperative to adhere to the law, open your doors, and let the public see and understand what is occurring.”
