Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LeftInTX

(34,295 posts)
20. So, this differs from ICE detainers...
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 12:08 PM
Thursday

Last edited Thu Mar 26, 2026, 01:05 PM - Edit history (2)

Because they're doing this at immigration courts, asylum interviews, citizenship swearing in ceremonies, divorce courts, small claims court, witnesses, family members and I assume ICE check ins?

As opposed to a ICE detainer in criminal court.

ICE Detainer: Triggered when fingerprints from a local arrest are shared with ICE.

And unfortunately "targeted person" could be just about anyone who is not a US citizen. (The US has a "right to refuse anyone" policy. Similar to "no shirts, no service". That doesn't mean they have to refuse, but it does mean it is subject to the whims of whoever is running the country)

(Immigration is a complicated area of the law!) OTOH, apprehending someone when they are performing a mandated civic duty under the jurisdiction of the US govt, is unconscionable.

Likewise, apprending them while they're in the hospital.... I believe ICE has also done this...

OTOH: Will anything improve??? Or will DOJ just allow this to continue??

More in-depth here; https://courthousenews.com/feds-admit-to-misleading-judge-about-ice-arrests-at-immigration-courts/
And here from 2025: https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-greenlights-ices-courthouse-arrests-in-new-york-city/ (It looks like the same case, but this is sure going slow)

The prosecutor wrote that the government would withdraw several briefs that had relied on the memo, as well as certain statements made in oral arguments in federal court in September. Oestreicher wrote that a previous order from U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel would likely need to be “reconsidered and re-briefed.” In September, Castel ruled that ICE could make arrests in courthouses and also made it harder for judges to dismiss cases. https://newrepublic.com/post/208190/doj-ice-lies-immigration-court-arrests-nyc-new-york



Example from Reddit

I have an aunt that had an order of deportation 25 years ago for illegal entry into the country, when she entered she was caught and then released, there was later a court meeting she did not attend (she was unaware) and the judge ruled to give her a deportation order. This person stayed in the country, they are married to a resident who became a US citizen (she was been married to him since before she illegally). Now about 8 years ago the person started fixing up their status, they have 1 us citizen kid and are still married to the US citizen father of that kid.

With their lawyer they requested to stop their order of deportation (there was an argument that she never received the summons, I believe the case was reopened) which was granted and they also filed for the provisional waiver, the waiver would pardon her original illegal entry into the country. The process would then continue which would allow them to leave the country and reapply for a visa under a need to support her disabled child and father. They've been doing check ins for all those years, she was granted a work permit that is renewed yearly and everything was fine, the waiver was granted late last year. Problem is now the lawyer says they don't have an active stop for the order of deportation (apparently it's supposed to be renewed he had 2 requests which were both granted but then he stopped arguing under prior administrations once it was first granted there was no real risk of deportation specially during COVID so paying more to renew wasn't worth it).

This held true and after all those check ins she was never detained, there was never any issues. But without the stop, the next check in could be a risk, the lawyer tried filing for another stop of the order of deportation in july but he says it may not be granted in time for the next check in, next check in is next week.

Again the waiver was approved, everything was going well, there's no criminal record (other than the original illegal entry). Now they're waiting for the date of when they're supposed to fly out to request the visa, problem is this check in has them worried because the lawyer says under the new administration they don't follow traditional processes so something like being detained could be possible despite everything being fine for the last 8 years. Is she at serious risk?

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Why the fuck doesn't the DOJ know the law on its own? Scrivener7 Thursday #1
Bondi is a boot licking ass. intheflow Thursday #2
Because all the competent lawyers are gone. Volaris Thursday #4
And as a related aside, the normal process is that DOJ tells the rest of the govt Volaris Thursday #5
Exactly! BumRushDaShow Thursday #7
Law? Under the Trump Regime? CaptainTruth Thursday #9
These fuckers cannot be locked up fast enough. n/t intheflow Thursday #3
The highly esteemed DOJ is now the Keystone Cops. sinkingfeeling Thursday #6
So, DOJ now in a battle against DHS? 'It's their fault we keep breaking laws'! My my, so much blaming going on. Attilatheblond Thursday #8
... BumRushDaShow Thursday #11
That one is a KEEPER! Attilatheblond Thursday #12
I found that years ago BumRushDaShow Thursday #13
Got it saved and link bookmarked! Attilatheblond Thursday #16
No problem! BumRushDaShow Thursday #18
It should be in DU's classic emojis! LeftInTX Thursday #17
... BumRushDaShow Thursday #19
So the DOJ is accusing ICE of fraud. Martin68 Thursday #10
Oopsie! We're just the DOJ. How could we have known. travelingthrulife Thursday #14
Lying, corrupt, DOJ trying to cover their ass now. republianmushroom Thursday #15
So, this differs from ICE detainers... LeftInTX Thursday #20
I Would Think DallasNE Friday #21
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»DOJ says it erroneously r...»Reply #20