At least 18 people have been held longer than judges ordered or re-arrested after being released, according to court testimony and advocacy lawyers, who estimate the true number is likely much higher because many immigrants represent themselves.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney pressed Nathan Rasper, the acting field director for ICE in Colorado, to explain how immigrants can be re-detained after a court has ordered them freed while they pursue their immigration cases.

“Are you understanding the court’s concern?” Sweeney asked.

Rasper, who said he has held the job for only a few weeks, replied “yes,” but offered little beyond confusion about the rules his agents should follow—rules that federal courts in multiple jurisdictions have spelled out repeatedly.

Sweeney then turned to the two assistant U.S. attorneys seated beside Rasper.

“ICE is not in the position to monitor its own conduct in terms of its legality,” she said. “It is not something the court will tolerate. It’s a due process violation … it’s truly egregious in terms of a constitutional violation. I will be issuing an order that reflects that.”

The controversy has been building for weeks as lawyers for detainees increasingly turn to federal court with petitions for writs of habeas corpus—requests that a judge order the government to justify a person’s detention. The surge comes amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, which has poured unprecedented resources into enforcement and rapidly hired and deployed new agents with limited training, according to prior reporting.

The result has overwhelmed the federal bench in Colorado. Last week, U.S. District Judge Nina Wang confronted Assistant U.S. Attorney Jane Bobet Rejko over missed deadlines in hundreds of habeas cases.

“You can imagine that it’s hard to adjudicate cases in a manner that seems fair to all litigants without responses,” Wang told her.

Rejko apologized, saying her office receives 100 civil immigration cases a week. “It is not an excuse,” she said. “We take your honor’s concerns extremely seriously.” She acknowledged that some cases “fell through the cracks.”

Wang ordered the U.S. Attorney’s Office to file status reports every 48 hours until the backlog is resolved.

“I’m significantly concerned that these petitioners are being released contrary to the orders of the release, and it’s taking days for the court to understand it,” Wang said. “I am finding that the actual practice right now is creating even more work on this judicial officer. We have thousands of cases that are not immigration cases, and my staff is working around the clock.”

Testimony also revealed that ICE officials appear not to have read the court orders they are accused of violating. Last week, assistant ICE field officer Nicole Black told Wang that it was ICE’s position that anytime someone is released, the agency can modify the court’s conditions.

“The executive agency has the authority to modify a court order?” Wang asked.

“I’m not sure of that,” Black said.

When Wang asked whether Black had ever been given copies of court decisions in the district holding that additional conditions after a habeas grant violate constitutional rights, Black answered, “No.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Soler quickly interjected, insisting the government was not making that argument. “I’m not suggesting to the court that … they can modify the court’s order in any capacity, and that is not our argument, and I want to make that very clear,” he said. “I think we’re all kind of in this at the same time, going through this together.”

Wang left open the possibility of sanctions against the federal government.

The human toll was on display in interviews and court statements. Carlos Garcia, an undocumented immigrant, said he was ordered released on Oct. 27 but was re-arrested after taking a single step outside the Aurora ICE Detention Center. He described being handcuffed to his waist and placed in a van with four others, then driven to ICE’s Centennial office.

“I was telling one of the ICE agents, ‘Hey, I’m still in the process of fighting my case. I don’t know if you guys are rearresting us, but it feels like it,’” Garcia said. “And the ICE agent, he said, ‘You guys found a way to get out. You guys found a loophole to get out legally. So we found a way,’ and he said it sarcastically; he said it with a smirk on his face. He said, so we found a way to rearrest you guys. And then he said, ‘legally.’”

Sweeney said it was “completely inappropriate” that people released from custody live in fear of being re-arrested. “It needs to be addressed,” she said. Rasper told her the re-arrests had stopped for now.

In a court filing over the weekend, lawyers for the ACLU of Colorado wrote that the cases represent “an appalling new take on existing … strategies by ICE to terrify people and defy court orders.” They warned that without swift intervention, “ICE will likely continue these brutal, unlawful tactics in defiance of the court, causing profound harm to this court’s authority.”

The violations in Colorado range from requiring ankle monitors for people ordered released without conditions to full re-arrests moments after release.

One assistant field office director last week offered a defense akin to “the dog ate my homework,” admitting she didn’t see an order for several days even though it sat in an ICE email inbox. Rasper told Sweeney he verbally told Colorado agents in October that re-arresting someone “based on public safety concerns” was permissible, and said he was unaware of agreements between prosecutors, his lawyers, and judges.

U.S. Attorney Peter McNeilly, a Trump appointee, observed Monday’s hearing from a bench in Sweeney’s courtroom but declined to comment. ICE said it had no comment on the ongoing proceedings.

The hearings signal a growing willingness by federal judges to hold immigration authorities accountable as habeas petitions flood the courts. With thousands of non-immigration cases also on their dockets, judges warn that ICE’s noncompliance is straining the entire federal judicial system in Colorado—and eroding the rule of law.