ICE Won't Answer Your FOIA Request — And Your Loved One May Be Running Out of Time
You filed. You waited. The agency went silent. That silence is not just a procedural inconvenience — it may be a denial of the access the statute promises you.
If you filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for records about a detained family member, a removal proceeding, or an ICE enforcement encounter — and the response window has come and gone — you are not stuck. The statute that gives you the right to those records also gives you a remedy when the agency does not honor that right.
We are Novo Legal Group, a Denver-based, bilingual immigration and civil-rights firm with a federal-court practice. We sue the government over delayed and denied immigration-records requests, and we do it inside the broader FOIA litigation practice for immigration records that this spoke sits underneath. When ICE goes silent on a request that matters to a bond hearing, a removal hearing, or a deportation-defense strategy, we are the firm that picks up the phone and fights.
Why ICE FOIA Requests Stall
ICE FOIA delays are rarely a single moving part. The agency's own landing page says it is "experiencing a high volume of FOIA requests" — true as far as it goes, and not the whole story. The structural reasons a request stalls inside ICE are predictable, and naming them is the first step toward deciding whether the silence on your file is lawful, fixable, or actionable.
Volume, multi-agency referrals, and record-system complexity
ICE holds a specific, narrow set of immigration records: SEVIS records for students and exchange visitors, medical and other records generated while a person was detained, Form I-213 (Record of Deportable Alien), bond obligor records, and ICE investigation records. ICE itself notes that "most ICE records are also in your immigration file at USCIS." That single sentence is the single most important fact on the ICE FOIA landing page — and the single most-missed by non-specialists.
What that means in practice: requests sent to ICE for records that actually live at USCIS get referred out, and the referral itself adds intake-and-acknowledge time at the receiving component. Requests that genuinely belong at ICE may still touch multiple internal record systems, and a complex search takes longer than a simple one. A request implicating ICE custody, investigative, and litigation records may touch more than one internal ICE record system, and that internal handoff can extend the timeline. (ICE's Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA) handles ICE FOIA administrative appeals — a separate step that comes into play only if the agency issues an adverse determination and the requester appeals.)
Common stall points
The most common patterns we see when a family or a referring attorney calls us in:
- Misrouted requests. Records that USCIS holds (the A-file and the bulk of immigration history) sent to ICE — and vice versa — sit in referral limbo. ICE may issue a narrow ICE-only response while the bulk of the file remains at USCIS.
- "Still searching" holds. The statute permits a single ten-working-day extension for "unusual circumstances," and ICE may invoke it when a search reaches across multiple internal record systems. An "unusual circumstances" notice is not, however, a license to go silent indefinitely.
- Exemption review. Investigation records and bond obligor records are frequently reviewed for law-enforcement-sensitive material, and that review takes time. Longer review, longer wait.
- Third-party and consent issues. When you are filing for someone other than yourself — your detained brother, your spouse, your son — ICE requires a Certification of Identity from you (this is ICE's own form, not the USCIS G-639 used for A-file requests at USCIS). A missing or defective certification triggers an intake-stage hold, and the cure letter may not arrive in time to matter.
A separate, current wrinkle: effective February 23, 2026, ICE generally no longer accepts hard-copy (mail) FOIA requests, with an exception for detained individuals seeking their own records. Requests filed by paper after that date, by anyone outside that narrow exception, are rejected — and the rejection itself becomes a stall vector.
The Statutory Clock and "Constructive Exhaustion"
This is the section where most websites get the law wrong. We will not.
The agency's general response window
Under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i), the agency generally must determine within 20 business days whether it will comply with a FOIA request — meaning issue an initial response identifying records, exemptions, and any production estimate. That deadline is the determination clock, not the production clock. Producing records may take longer, and a single ten-working-day "unusual circumstances" extension can apply under § 552(a)(6)(B) when the agency needs to search field facilities, examine voluminous distinct records, or consult with another agency that has a substantial interest in the request.
ICE is not exempt from any of that. The clock that runs against USCIS runs against ICE too.
What happens when the deadline passes
When the agency misses the statutory time limit, 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C) deems the requester to have exhausted administrative remedies — meaning you may be able to sue in federal court without first completing the agency's appeal process. That is called constructive exhaustion, and it is the doorway from a stalled administrative request to a federal-court complaint.
There is a carve-out we will not collapse. The same paragraph permits the court to "retain jurisdiction and allow the agency additional time" if the agency demonstrates "exceptional circumstances" and "due diligence" in responding to the request. That is a safety valve, not a hard production deadline. The honest framing is the one Congress wrote: you may be able to proceed in federal court — not automatically, and not without the agency getting a chance to be heard.
Fees and costs if you have to litigate
Under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E), a court may award reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs to a requester who has "substantially prevailed" — meaning obtained relief through a judicial order, an enforceable agreement, or a voluntary change in the agency's position on a non-insubstantial claim. Fee awards are discretionary. That fee-shifting provision is one reason FOIA litigation is a realistic remedy and not just a paper right. It is not, however, an automatic recovery.
When Someone Is Detained: Urgency and Expedited Processing
For the families we hear from most often, the FOIA delay is not abstract. There is a person in custody. There is a date on a calendar. The records are needed to fight the case.
Why a stalled ICE FOIA hits hardest on a bond or removal timeline
When ICE detention puts a person on the immigration-court track, the calendar starts moving fast. A master-calendar hearing, a bond hearing, an individual-merits hearing — each one becomes a deadline by which the legal team needs to know what is in the file. A FOIA stuck inside ICE's queue does not just frustrate a requester; it constrains the defense.
Expedited processing for individuals in removal proceedings
The statute, 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E), requires agencies to grant expedited processing where the requester shows a "compelling need" — defined to include an imminent threat to life or physical safety — and to decide on the expedited request within 10 days. Expedited treatment speeds the determination. It does not guarantee a production deadline.
ICE publishes four bases on which it may grant expedited processing: (1) compelling need (imminent threat to life or physical safety); (2) urgency to inform the public about federal government activity (for requesters primarily engaged in disseminating information); (3) risk of losing substantial due process rights; and (4) widespread and exceptional media interest with possible questions about government integrity affecting public confidence. The third basis — risk of losing substantial due process rights — is the one most directly on point when a detained person has an imminent hearing and the records are needed to mount the defense. ICE adopts that ground from the Department of Justice regulatory standard at 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d); it is broader than the two statutory § 552(a)(6)(E)(v) "compelling need" categories.
The expedited-processing request itself must include a statement "certified to be true and correct." That certification is a piece of work, and getting it right is part of why people work with counsel at this stage.
How records support a deportation-defense strategy
ICE records can show what ICE relied on, what notices were served, what custody decisions were made, and the procedural posture of the case. A deportation-defense attorney — whether at our firm or elsewhere — uses that record to plan the case: to test the basis for detention, evaluate the strength of the government's narrative, and identify procedural and substantive defenses. Our role on the FOIA side is not to drive the underlying defense strategy. It is to make sure the records the defense team needs are actually in their hands when they need them.
When a Lawsuit Is an Option — and What a Court Can and Cannot Order
We approach FOIA litigation seriously because the statute does. Here is the honest read on when going to court makes sense, and what a court can actually do once you are there.
When FOIA / APA litigation becomes available
The cases that belong in federal court tend to share at least one of these features: the statutory response deadline has passed and the agency has gone silent or refuses to engage; an administrative appeal of a denial of records (or a denial of expedited processing) has been exhausted or, by operation of § 552(a)(6)(C), constructively exhausted; or a hearing or filing deadline is closing in and the records are essential to the underlying case.
There is real precedent for federal-court intervention in immigration-records-delay matters. A federal court in the Northern District of California has found a pattern-or-practice of unreasonable delay in USCIS A-file FOIA processing — affecting USCIS, DHS, and ICE as defendants — and entered a permanent injunction requiring the agencies to comply with the statute. Nightingale v. USCIS, No. 3:19-cv-03512, 2020 WL 7640547 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2020) (Orrick, J.). According to the most recent court-filed compliance reports we have reviewed, that order remains in force and the court continues to supervise compliance. Nightingale is on point for USCIS A-file requests specifically, and applies to an ICE-side matter only when a requester is also pursuing the parallel USCIS A-file FOIA — which, given that "most ICE records are also in your immigration file at USCIS," is often the highest-yield path.
What a court can do
A FOIA lawsuit gives a federal court the authority to review whether the agency improperly withheld records that the statute requires it to release. If a court finds wrongful withholding, a court can order improperly withheld records released and set a production schedule the agency has to follow. The court can also review the adequacy of the agency's search and order an adequate one if the search was deficient, and examine each claimed exemption — including law-enforcement exemptions — and order release of segregable, non-exempt portions.
What a court will not promise
A lawsuit does not force immediate production. Timeline depends on the agency, the records, applicable exemptions, and litigation posture — never guaranteed. A court can order release of improperly withheld records, but the court cannot promise a date certain. Fee recovery is also not automatic — fees are discretionary, and the requester must "substantially prevail." We do not promise outcomes. We promise that we will take your case seriously, file it competently, and litigate it like the federal-court matter it is.
How Novo Legal litigates federal records cases
We approach FOIA litigation as a government-accountability matter, not just records retrieval. You can see the broader pattern of that work in the cases we have built into a public results repository and in our FOIA litigation practice for immigration records.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long can ICE take to respond to a FOIA request?
Under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i), the agency generally must determine within 20 business days whether it will comply — meaning issue an initial response identifying records, exemptions, and any production estimate. That deadline is the determination clock, not the production clock; producing records may take longer, and a ten-working-day "unusual circumstances" extension can apply.
ICE never responded to my FOIA request — is that legal, and what can I do?
When ICE misses the statutory time limit, 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C) deems the requester to have exhausted administrative remedies — meaning you may be able to file suit in federal court without first completing the agency's appeal process. The court can still allow the agency more time on a showing of exceptional circumstances and due diligence. The right next step is a straight read on your facts from counsel.
Can I sue ICE to get records released?
When the agency misses the statutory time limit, you may be able to sue in federal court. A court can order improperly withheld records released and set a production schedule. A court cannot promise immediate production. Timeline depends on the agency, the records, applicable exemptions, and litigation posture — never guaranteed.
Can I get ICE records about a family member who's detained?
Yes, in general — third-party requests are allowed when the requester certifies their identity and authority. ICE requires a Certification of Identity form (which is ICE's own form, not the USCIS G-639 used for A-file requests at USCIS) and may require additional proof of authority depending on the record type. If your relative is detained and accessible, their signed consent typically resolves the third-party question.
Will a lawsuit get my records faster?
It may. A federal court can order improperly withheld records released and can set a production schedule the agency has to follow. A court cannot promise immediate production, and timeline depends on the agency, the records, applicable exemptions, and litigation posture. The honest answer is that litigation often changes the agency's posture on a stalled request — but no responsible lawyer promises a date certain.