A federal judge in New York has barred an assistant U.S. attorney from an immigration lawsuit, accusing him of deliberately misleading the court about the scope of an injunction in a related case.

U.S. District Judge Sanket Bulsara ordered Thomas Price to withdraw from *Benitez v. Department of Homeland Security* by Nov. 13 and warned that further confirmed misrepresentations could result in a default judgment for the plaintiffs. The lawsuit alleges that federal immigration officers in New York arrest people based on their ethnicity and without legally required warrants.

The dispute centers on a Nov. 4 government letter bearing Price’s name. It told Bulsara that an injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Gary Brown in *Sanchez Alfaro v. Mullin* applied only to the petitioner in that case.

Brown’s order, however, stated that before making a civil immigration arrest “in this judicial district,” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement must obtain a valid arrest warrant in advance, with an exception for people likely to flee. The case involved a Long Island man with Special Immigrant Juvenile status whom officers arrested without a warrant and later acknowledged was the wrong person.

Price had also filed briefs in the *Sanchez Alfaro* case arguing that a district-wide warrant requirement would be difficult for the government to follow.

At a hearing, Bulsara called the November letter a “deliberate attempt to mislead the Court” and said it was part of “a pattern of dissembling, obfuscation, and frankly outright misrepresentation” extending from the earlier case into the *Benitez* litigation.

In a subsequent order, Bulsara said he had found prima facie violations of Rule 11, which governs representations made to the court. He directed that all future filings in the case be signed by Richard Hayes, chief of the civil division in the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of New York, or an official at his supervisory level or higher.

The office must also explain by Nov. 16 why it should not face sanctions. Two other assistant U.S. attorneys whose names appeared on the letter have the same deadline to submit sworn declarations describing their roles in writing, editing or supervising it. Bulsara indicated that they could also be disqualified unless they show they were not involved.

The judge warned that if the court discovers another false statement by a lawyer, witness or declarant, and confirms preliminary findings after an opportunity to be heard, it will enter a default judgment for the plaintiffs, leaving only the question of remedies.

Hayes did not address the misconduct allegations at the hearing and requested time to review the transcript.