Judicial Branch denies marshals impeded ICE
Connecticut Judicial BranchConnecticut Judicial Branch spokeswoman
A Connecticut Judicial Branch spokeswoman said the branch's review found no evidence that marshals impeded ICE's work during the Meriden arrest, while its broader review of the incident continued.
“Based on our review of videos and interviews conducted to date, we do not believe that our marshals impeded the work of federal officials. ... As our review of the incident continues, we will be mindful of these allegations and will take action if necessary.”
Reporting

Where this statement fits
Did ICE's conduct at the Meriden, Connecticut, courthouse violate the state's TRUST Act?
On September 23, 2026, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, some wearing face coverings, entered a courthouse in Meriden, Connecticut, and took Welington Leonel Almara-Diaz into custody. Activists confronted the agents outside the courthouse entrance, asking why they were violating the state's TRUST Act, which limits immigration enforcement at Connecticut courthouses; sources disagree on whether the law's separate ban on masked law enforcement was already in effect that day. Judicial marshals moved activists away from the entrance; one woman was pepper-sprayed and another fell and was taken to a hospital by ambulance, though sources also disagree on who pushed her. The Connecticut Judicial Branch confirmed marshals had received a warrant of removal or deportation before the arrest and said it was reviewing whether state law was followed. ICE said the arrest was appropriate because Almara-Diaz had a 2023 removal order, and said judicial marshals impeded the arrest; the Judicial Branch later said its review did not support that. State officials, including Attorney General William Tong and Governor Ned Lamont's office, said ICE's conduct at the courthouse was improper. The dispute is whether ICE's conduct at the courthouse, including its use of face coverings and how the operation and marshals' cooperation with it were carried out, complied with the TRUST Act.
Source and context
Reporting
About this source
Reports on-record reactions from state legislative leaders, the Attorney General, the Governor's office, an immigrant-advocacy coalition and the Judicial Branch as the TRUST Act's October 1 protected-spaces provision approached.
Before the quotation
Judicial Marshal Services had received a warrant of removal or deportation before the September 23 arrest, and the branch said the same day it was reviewing video of the incident.
After the quotation
The branch's review of whether state law was followed was still ongoing when the statement was made.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The branch explicitly says its review does not support the claim that marshals impeded federal officials, directly denying that part of ICE's account.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
More from this case
Read the full caseStafstrom calls for further protections after the Meriden arrest
“an abusive, scandal-ridden and frankly destabilizing force”Read statement
Barrett withholds a verdict on whether the Meriden arrest violated state law
“to figure out if our law was violated here”Read statement
Hands Off Connecticut calls the marshals' cooperation with ICE "an unforgivable act of collaboration"
Hands Off Connecticut
“When federal agents barged into the state courthouse in Meriden, they did not just abduct another community member, they fundamentally challenged the legitimacy of our state government. Marshals opened the doors wide for ICE while pushing the citizens out of their own courthouse. ICE went so far as to pepper spray bystanders and a marshal assaulted another, causing one to be taken from the court by ambulance to the ER. This is an unforgivable act of collaboration, for which we demand justice.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Judicial Branch denies marshals impeded ICE
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/3272-a-connecticut-judicial-branch-spokeswoman-said-the-branch
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Judicial Branch denies marshals impeded ICE". First published: 2026-09-29. Last updated: 2026-09-29. https://disputeindex.com/events/3272-a-connecticut-judicial-branch-spokeswoman-said-the-branch