NJ Attorney General Reviewing Claims ICE Used the Roxbury Warehouse in Violation of a May Court Agreement

The New Jersey Attorney General’s office confirmed in mid-September 2026 that it is “carefully reviewing” allegations that ICE transported a person arrested in Dover on September 4 to the Roxbury warehouse in Morris County — a 470,000-square-foot site barred from housing detainees under a May 12 court agreement requiring completion of a NEPA environmental review before any ICE use. The Project No ICE North Jersey Alliance (Project NINJA) sent a September 11 letter to the AG’s office documenting the incident, including video collected by activists of ICE vehicles entering and leaving the facility. ICE has neither confirmed nor denied the allegation. A contempt motion would be the first such enforcement action at the site.

This entry is status: reported rather than confirmed, and the reason is the evidentiary posture: the central claim — that a detainee was brought inside a barred facility — rests on community-collected video and a resident advocacy group’s letter, with no agency confirmation and no filing yet. The AG’s “carefully reviewing” is the only official language on the record.

The structural interest is what a court agreement is worth once the litigation attention moves on. Roxbury is the site DHS abandoned after suit in June (2026-06-29–dhs-abandons-roxbury-nj-warehouse-ice-detention-after-lawsuit), then declined to foreclose in a July status report that kept its options open (2026-07-20–roxbury-nj-dhs-flip-flop-continuing-assess-status-report). If the allegation holds, the sequence is that a warehouse removed from the detention network by consent was used anyway, which would say something specific about the durability of the state-by-state wins that stalled the Detention Reengineering Initiative program-wide (2026-08-19–ice-detention-reengineering-initiative-stalls-program-wide-11-purchased-sites) — namely that a stalled acquisition and an unusable building are not the same thing. The person arrested in Dover is not named in these sources; per the deploy-with-dignity standard this entry does not supply one, and the individual is class-level-only for the victim-story index.