The Alameda County Superior Courthouse is seen in Oakland, Calif. (Jane Tyska/Digital First Media/East Bay Times via Getty Images)
OAKLAND, Calif. - The Alameda County court system appears to be the first in the Bay Area to narrowly define when a peace officer can carry a weapon inside a courthouse, which could also effectively prevent federal immigration officers from entering public court spaces when they are armed.
New weapons order mandates ‘official' business
FILE ART - A man walks into the Oakland Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse.
The policy by Alameda County courts, which went into effect on Jan. 15, comes amid a growing nationwide backlash against harsh tactics by federal immigration officers and the two recent shooting deaths of U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.
Alameda County's policy was devised by Alameda County Superior Court Presiding Judge Michael Markman, who oversees all courthouses in the county.
Under the policy, Alameda County courthouses prohibit all weapon-carrying peace officers from entering unless they have "official" business with the courts, and immigration enforcement activities are not considered official business. So, put another way, the new policy effectively bans armed federal immigration agents without specifically mentioning them.
In an interview with KTVU, Markman explained that immigration officers with federal immigration removal orders or civil warrants are not visiting on court business.
Federal agents could come in, however, to look up someone’s criminal history, just like any member of the public, however, as long as they aren’t carrying a weapon. And they could come in to arrest someone if they left their weapon outside. But as long as they are armed and inside the courthouse, deputies will only be allowed to let them inside if they can prove they have official business there.
As far as Markman knows, this is the first order of its kind.
Well aware of the national concern over immigration and the fears of many in the immigrant community over deportations and detentions, Markman said his job as presiding judge is to make the courthouse a "safe place."
"It’s my job to protect witnesses and victims," he said. "And I don’t want anyone to get hurt."
He added: "All I did was specifically define what official court business meant."
Specifically, Markman modified Alameda County courts' existing directive on "weapons security and health screening," by stating that any weapon-carrying peace officer must have official business in court that day. Official court business means helping sheriff’s deputies with mutual aid at their request, testifying in a case, making a criminal arrest, obtaining a warrant or meeting with the District Attorney. Weapons can include guns, Tasers, knives and batons.
An ICE spokesman told KTVU since the order did not directly pertain to his agency, he had no comment. An email requesting comment from the Department of Homeland Security went unanswered.
Policy doesn't go far enough: public defender
Alameda County Public Defender Brendon Woods speaks on Jan. 15, 2026 at a Together For All ad hoc committee meeting about ICE-free zones.
Prior to the policy change, six clients of the Alameda County Public Defender’s Office were arrested either in or near the county’s courthouses, according to information provided to the Board of Supervisors on Jan. 22.
According to Public Defender Brendon Woods, the first ICE arrest of one of his clients was in September 2025. He said a deputy public defender was meeting with his client for a routine pretrial hearing at Wiley Manuel Courthouse in Oakland.
After the judge called his case and gave him a new court date, Woods said the client exited the courtroom, while his public defender remained inside.
Two agents in plain clothes, who said they were from ICE, met him in the courthouse hallway and then took him out of the building, where an unmarked vehicle was waiting, Woods said. ICE eventually took him to a detention facility, and his exact status is unknown.
It's unclear if those agents were armed, or if they had judicial warrants. Woods wouldn’t identify the client or state what he was in court for.
At a Board of Supervisors meeting last month, Woods said he had no idea that Markman had issued a new directive, and he appeared disturbed that he hadn’t been looped in. He said he has been emailing the court since July and reminded the supervisors that it is his immigration attorneys who advocate for people involved in removal proceedings.
"I'm not sure the order actually bans ICE," Woods told KTVU in an interview. "I think the order is a good first step, but I don’t think it goes far enough."
Woods said the order prevents ICE from entering the courthouse if they are armed, "and that’s really all it does."
What would happen if an ICE officer left his or her gun outside in a van with colleagues to detain someone inside the courthouse?
"If an ICE agent walks up to someone in a courthouse and says, ‘I’m going to arrest you,’ do they need a weapon to do that? No," Woods said. "They’re going to handcuff you, and they’re going to walk them out."
Woods would like the order to state that ICE officers cannot conduct unlawful arrests – meaning they don’t have a judicial warrant – in the courthouse.
"That’s what’s missing," Woods said.
He also wants the order to clearly mandate that ICE officers identify themselves and identify their purpose.
Markman responded: "If only it were that simple."
He added that he agrees with Woods that a judicial warrant is necessary for ICE to detain someone, "but that is a federal legal question. As a state court presiding judge, I don't think I'm empowered to answer it in a general directive about safety or to just ban ICE agents."
Courthouse policies of other Bay Area counties
Alameda County Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Bas speaks on Jan. 15, 2026 at a Together For All ad hoc committee meeting about ICE-free zones.
KTVU surveyed the other Bay Area counties to see what their policies are.
Napa and Santa Clara County Superior Court systems said they follow the California Attorney General’s government code, which limits courts from assisting with immigration enforcement to the "fullest extent possible" consistent with state and federal law. These policies, enacted in 2018 when California became a sanctuary state, essentially say that court personnel shouldn’t ask anyone about immigration status or disclose citizenship, establish non-public areas of the courtroom where ICE officers can’t go unless they have a warrant and notify the presiding judge if federal agents are engaged in an immigration enforcement action.
San Francisco has its own, but similar, policy.
Marin, San Mateo and Contra Costa County Superior Courts do not have any such policy, their representatives told KTVU.
What makes Alameda County Superior Court’s policy different is that it actually doesn’t target ICE. The directive is aimed at anyone carrying a weapon.
Sheriff's deputies are gatekeepers to courthouses
Alameda County Sheriff Yesenia Sanchez speaks on Jan. 15, 2026 at a Together For All ad hoc committee meeting about ICE-free zones.
The burden of making sure that these rules are followed at the courthouses in Alameda County will fall to the Sheriff’s Office, whose deputies serve as the gatekeepers to the buildings.
At a Board of Supervisors "Together for All" ad hoc meeting on Jan. 15, Sheriff Yesenia Sanchez addressed Markman’s new order, telling the committee she just received the directive and is working through the details to figure out best to comply.
Specifically, some of the courthouses are jointly owned by the county and the state, and she needed time to sort through those logistics.
"We can’t intervene, but if they are in a public area, there’s nothing we can do about that," Sanchez told the supervisors. "We can’t stop an arrest. But we can ask them what their legal business is."
At the same meeting, District Attorney Ursula Jones-Dixon said she does not allow ICE officers into her individual offices, even though they may enter the building.
Jones-Dixon called Markman’s directive "pretty clear," adding that "the court doesn’t want anyone coming into the courthouse unless they have lawful business."