Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Apprehensions

by

mohamed_hassan-police-9844768_1280

A tragic case out of South Florida is raising serious concerns for teens pulled into the tight grip of immigration enforcement. A 19-year-old Mexican national, Royer Perez-Jimenez, recently died while in ICE custody at a detention facility, with early reports pointing to a possible suicide. The incident is still under investigation, but it highlights ongoing concerns about conditions inside immigration detention centers.

His death marks the youngest reported in ICE custody during President Trump’s second term and adds to a growing number of detainee deaths nationwide. At least 36 people have died in ICE custody since January 2025, continuing an alarming trend.

In light of this tragedy, the Mexican government has called for a thorough investigation, emphasizing concerns over detainee safety and accountability. Meanwhile, longstanding issues within detention centers persist, including reports of poor conditions, inadequate medical care, and the psychological toll of prolonged detention.

ICE maintains that detainees are held in safe and humane conditions and receive appropriate medical care. However, the increasing number of deaths continues to fuel public scrutiny, with calls for greater oversight and systemic reform.

Continue reading

by
54234938168_663c4a24e3_c

Source: Flickr Creative Commons Attribution Gage Skidmore

On March 5, 2026, President Donald Trump announced the firing of Kristi Noem as Homeland Security Secretary and nominated Senator Markwayne Mullin to take her place at the helm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Noem’s tenure had been controversial, drawing bipartisan scrutiny over hardline immigration enforcement tactics including the deaths of U.S. Citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti, as well as internal management issues at DHS. Her replacement reflects not just a personnel change but a continuation of the administration’s approach to immigration and border security.

Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican with a decade of legislative experience and close ties to Trump, brings to the role a firm commitment to strict immigration enforcement. Although some hoped the shake-up might bring a softer approach to immigration, most signs point to continuity, with Mullin expected to maintain the administration’s focus on border security and strict enforcement.

Continue reading

by

visa-3653492_1280On December 2, 2025, USCIS issued a policy memorandum placing a hold on numerous immigration benefit requests and ordering the re-examination of previously approved cases.

What the Memo Says: Key Provisions

  • Pending benefit requests frozen for many nationals. USCIS is pausing processing of all pending immigration benefit requests if the applicant’s country of birth or citizenship is one of the 19 countries listed in the June 2025 travel ban.
  • Affected Benefit Requests: The pause will affect pending Form I-485 (Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status), Form I-90 (Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card (Green Card)), Form N-470 (Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes), Form I-751, (Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence), and Form I-131 (Application for Travel Documents, Parole Documents, and Arrival/Departure Records).
  • Re-review of approved benefits. Immigration benefits (green cards, status adjustments, travel documents, etc.) already approved may now be subject to re-review if the beneficiary entered the U.S. on or after January 20, 2021.
  • Asylum applications on pause — for everyone. All pending Forms I-589 (Asylum / Withholding of Removal applications) have been paused, regardless of nationality. The hold will remain in effect until lifted by the USCIS Director
  • Extensive list of potentially affected benefits. The freeze could impact I-485 adjustment-of-status applications, green-card renewals, travel documents, removal of conditional residence, preservation of residence for naturalization, and more. Employer-sponsored petitions may also face delays or uncertainty.

In short: thousands of pending and even approved immigration benefit cases could now be delayed or re-evaluated. The USCIS policy memorandum states that in light of recent threats to the American people:

Continue reading

by

prison-370112_1280Introducing sweeping changes, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has expanded its role by gaining law enforcement powers previously limited to agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Under a new final rule published today, USCIS will now recruit 1,811-classified special agents—fully empowered officers with authority—to investigate, arrest, and prosecute individuals violating U.S. immigration laws.

What’s Changed?

  • Law Enforcement Authority: The newly designated USCIS special agents are authorized to carry firearms, execute search and arrest warrants, make arrests, and use force—including in pursuit and potentially lethal situations—under standard federal law enforcement protocols.
  • Operational Autonomy: Previously, USCIS investigations—especially those involving criminal violations—were referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
  • Enforcement Agency: Now, USCIS itself can manage law enforcement investigations from start to finish, including investigating civil and criminal violations within the jurisdiction of USCIS and ordering expedited removal when warranted.

Continue reading

by

marek-studzinski-9U9I-eVx9nI-unsplash-scaled

A new UC Berkeley IGS poll shows that a strong majority of California voters disapprove of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics. Nearly 70% of respondents said they are unhappy with how immigration is being handled in the state — and many reported emotional responses to images of raids, describing them as unfair and upsetting.

The poll reveals a sharp political divide. Ninety-five percent of Democrats expressed disapproval with Trump’s immigration enforcement, while 79% of Republicans voiced support. Emotional reactions followed suit: most Democrats said they felt anger or sadness when shown footage of enforcement actions, while most Republicans felt hopeful or satisfied.

Specific policy questions revealed more tension. An overwhelming majority of Democrats support requiring immigration agents to wear visible ID and oppose raids in places like schools and hospitals. Republicans were more divided, with only about half supporting agent identification and a slight majority favoring enforcement in public spaces.

The issue of birthright citizenship also proved polarizing. 67% of Republicans said they support ending automatic citizenship for children born to undocumented parents, while 92% of Democrats opposed such a move.

Continue reading

by

judge-8779957_1280In a significant victory for civil rights and immigrant advocacy groups, a federal appeals court has upheld a lower court’s decision to temporarily block federal immigration agents from conducting immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without reasonable suspicion.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued the ruling late Friday, marking a major legal development in the ongoing battle over immigration enforcement and constitutional protections.

At the heart of the case is the question of whether federal agents can detain individuals based solely on generalized characteristics such as race, ethnicity, or language. The appeals court was clear: they cannot.

A Firm Rejection of Racial Profiling

The three-judge panel ruled that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agents cannot use factors like “apparent race, ethnicity, speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, particular location, and type of work” as the basis for reasonable suspicion to stop an individual. Even taken together, the court stated, these characteristics form only a broad profile and fail to meet the legal standard required for a lawful stop.

“We agree with the district court that…these factors do not demonstrate reasonable suspicion for any particular stop,” the panel wrote, emphasizing the constitutional protections that apply to all individuals, regardless of immigration status.

Continue reading

by

prison-370112_1280A new lawsuit filed by a man detained in San Diego, California, is challenging the controversial practice of courthouse arrests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) taking place in recent months. The case could offer critical insight into the government’s approach in making these arrests. (A.M. v. Larose (3:25-cv-01412))

The man identified in court filings as A.M. is seeking asylum in the United States after being subjected to torture in his home country from his human rights advocacy. On June 3, he arrived for what he believed would be a routine immigration court hearing but was shocked to find that the judge had dismissed his case and ICE agents were waiting outside, ready to arrest him and take him to Otay Mesa’s Detention Facility to eventually be deported.

Unfortunately, A.M.’s case is not unique. In recent months, the Trump administration has enforced a controversial policy in immigration courts to expedite deportations by instructing judges to swiftly dismiss cases, subjecting individuals to expedited removal without giving them a meaningful opportunity to contest the government’s claims or consult attorneys.

This approach, detailed in a May 30 directive from the Executive Office for Immigration Review, encourages judges to grant oral motions to dismiss without the standard 10-day response period, effectively eliminating opportunities for individuals to contest their cases. Once dismissed, individuals are immediately eligible for expedited removal, making it possible for ICE officers to arrest them.

Continue reading

by

lawyer-3819044_1280The growing presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials at immigration courthouses nationwide has prompted several states to enact laws preventing ICE from arresting or detaining individuals attending their immigration hearings.

One such law passed by the state of New York is the “Protect Our Courts Act,” which shields individuals from being arrested by federal immigration authorities like ICE while traveling to, attending, or leaving court proceedings. This law is designed to guarantee that people can access the justice system without fearing immigration-related repercussions. It forbids arrests in these situations unless a judicial warrant or court order is shown to court personnel.

On June 12th the Justice Department sued the state of New York challenging the constitutionality of the Act under the supremacy clause. The government argues that it unlawfully obstructs federal immigration enforcement operations.

The Trump administration is seeking to invalidate these laws to facilitate detention and removal. According to the government, arrests at courthouses helps prevent individuals from evading authorities and decreases safety risks because of the security offered by courthouses.

In response to the lawsuit, the New York Civil Liberties Union issued a statement defending the state law adding, “This latest attempt by the Trump administration to meddle in our laws would push immigrant communities further into the shadows, throw due process out the window, and weaken trust in our justice system — making everyone less safe. It sends a dangerous message: that ICE can and should operate wherever it wants, regardless of the human cost.”

Continue reading

by

arrested-8303916_1280In the latest clash between the Trump administration and the judiciary—Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan has been arrested by agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for accusations of helping a man evade immigration authorities.

This all went down on Friday April 25th after allegations that the judge directed an undocumented immigrant and his lawyer to exit her courtroom through a side door after learning that federal immigration agents were waiting in the hallway to arrest him.

Upon being spotted by agents outside the courthouse, the man was pursued on foot and was ultimately taken into custody.

These actions have prompted a showdown over allegations of obstruction of justice amid Trump’s immigration crackdowns. The U.S. attorney general Pam Bondi has accused the judge of interfering with the government’s enforcement priorities claiming the arrest sends a “strong message” to judges that they will be prosecuted if they “escort a criminal defendant out a back door.”

The circumstances surrounding the judge’s arrest remain unclear. What is known is that six federal officers descended upon the Milwaukee County Courthouse to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican national attending a court hearing to respond to battery charges in connection with a criminal complaint filed by his roommate.

Continue reading

by

america-41776_1280It has been quite a whirlwind in the two months since President Trump has taken office.

From mass deportations to interrogations at U.S. ports of entry, the White House has delivered on their campaign promises to limit immigration by any means necessary.

Now we are learning that immigration enforcement is about to get even tougher for those in removal proceedings.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is now cooperating with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to help officers verify the names and residential addresses of undocumented immigrants they are trying to deport from the United States.

Three government officials recently spoke with New York Times reporters revealing that the tax agency will be helping facilitate Trump’s mass deportations.

This shift in policy is extremely concerning given that thousands of undocumented immigrants provide information about where they are living when filing tax returns with the IRS using individual taxpayer identification numbers (ITINs) instead of Social Security numbers.

Initially, the IRS had refused Trump’s requests to hand over the residential addresses of undocumented immigrants in removal proceedings because federal law prohibits improper disclosure.

Continue reading