logo
Low-income migrants fined up to $2.3 million by Trump administration

Low-income migrants fined up to $2.3 million by Trump administration

Straits Times20-05-2025

Immigration lawyers said their clients had been fined from several thousand dollars to just over US$1.8 million. PHOTO: REUTERS
WASHINGTON - Ms Wendy Ortiz was surprised to find out she was being fined by US immigration authorities for being in the country illegally - but it was the amount that truly shocked her: US$1.8 million (S$2.3 million) .
Ms Ortiz, 32, who earns US$13 an hour in her job at a meatpacking plant in Pennsylvania, has lived in the United States for a decade, after fleeing El Salvador to escape a violent ex-partner and gang threats, she said in an interview and in immigration paperwork.
Her salary barely covers rent and expenses for her autistic 6-year-old US-citizen son.
'It's not fair,' she said. 'Where is someone going to find that much money?'
In the last few weeks, US President Donald Trump has started to operationalise a plan to fine migrants who fail to leave the US after a final deportation order, issuing notices to 4,500 migrants with penalties totaling more than US$500 million, a senior Trump official said, requesting anonymity to share internal figures.
Reuters spoke with eight immigration lawyers around the country who said their clients had been fined from several thousand dollars to just over US$1.8 million.
The recipients of the notices were informed that they had 30 days to contest, in writing, under oath, and with evidence as to why the penalty should not be imposed.
The steep fines are part of Mr Trump's aggressive push to get immigrants in the US illegally to leave the country voluntarily, or 'self deport'.
The Trump administration plan, details of which were first reported by Reuters in April, include levying fines of US$998 per day for migrants who failed to leave the US after a deportation order.
The administration planned to issue fines retroactively for up to five years, Reuters reported.
Under that framework, the maximum would be US$1.8 million. The government would then consider seizing the property of immigrants who could not pay.
It remains unclear exactly how the Trump administration would collect the fines and seize property.
Immigration lawyers baffled
The fines reviewed by Reuters were issued by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but a separate agency - Customs and Border Protection - has been asked to process them and handle potential forfeitures, Reuters reported in April.
CBP is still working out the complicated logistics to conduct seizures, a CBP official said, requesting anonymity.
The US Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in April that immigrants in the US illegally should 'self deport and leave the country now'.
The fines stem from a 1996 law that was enforced for the first time in 2018, during Mr Trump's first term in office, and target the roughly 1.4 million migrants who have been ordered deported by an immigration judge.
The Trump administration withdrew fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars against nine migrants who sought sanctuary in churches in his first term after a legal challenge, but proceeded with smaller penalties. Mr Joe Biden's administration dropped the fines in 2021.
Mr Robert Scott, a New York City-based immigration lawyer, said he was baffled when one of his clients - a low-income Mexican woman who has lived in the US for 25 years - also received a US$1.8 million fine.
'At first you look at something like this and think it's fake,' he said. 'I've never seen a client receive anything like this.'
Mr Scott said the woman received a final deportation order in 2013 but was not aware of it at the time. The woman filed a motion i n 2024 to reopen the removal order, which is still pending, Mr Scott said.
'She hasn't been hiding,' he said. 'I find it curious that they would pick on someone like that. I don't know if it's random, I don't know if she's low-hanging fruit. I don't know.'
Seeking relief, then targeted
After crossing the border in 2015, Ms Ortiz was released to pursue her asylum claim when an officer found she had a credible fear of persecution, documents show. But she said she never received an immigration court hearing notice and was ordered deported after failing to show up to court in 2018.
Ms Ortiz's immigration lawyer requested humanitarian relief from the US government on Jan 8, saying she faced danger in El Salvador and that her son would not have access to services for autistic children. The petition asked for 'prosecutorial discretion' and for the government to reopen and dismiss her case.
Axel, son of Ms Wendy Ortiz, waits to go to the park, at their home in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, on May 17.
PHOTO: REUTERS
Twelve days later, Mr Trump took office and launched his wide-ranging immigration crackdown.
Ms Rosina Stambaugh, Ms Ortiz's attorney, said she had requested a 30-day extension and was considering ways to fight the fine in court.
'She is a mother of an autistic child, she has no criminal history, and they have all of her background information,' Ms Stambaugh said. 'I just think it's absolutely insane.'
Lawyers said clients who received the notices also included spouses of US citizens, who were actively trying to legalise their immigration status.
Ms Rosa, a US citizen in New York, said her Honduran husband was fined US$5,000. She said her husband was not able to leave the country after being granted voluntary departure in 2018 because she was diagnosed with uterine cancer.
She hopes once she explains the situation, that the fine may be waived. If not, she said, he will have to work many extra hours to pay it.
'It's one thing after the other,' she said. 'This whole process has cost us so much money.' REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

IAEA chief relays Iran warning against Israeli strikes on nuclear facilities
IAEA chief relays Iran warning against Israeli strikes on nuclear facilities

Straits Times

timean hour ago

  • Straits Times

IAEA chief relays Iran warning against Israeli strikes on nuclear facilities

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi holds a news conference after the first day of the agency's quarterly Board of Governors meeting at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria, June 9, 2025. REUTERS/Lisa Leutner CAIRO - International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Grossi said Iranians warned him that an Israel strike on the country's nuclear facilities could cause Iran to be more determined about developing a nuclear weapon, according to an interview broadcast and published on Monday. 'A strike could potentially have an amalgamating effect, solidifying Iran's determination – I will say it plainly – to pursue a nuclear weapon or withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,' Grossi said in the interview, published on the Jerusalem Post website and broadcast on i24 TV on Monday. Grossi, however, doubted that Israel would strike Tehran's nuclear facilities, the Jerusalem Post reported. The Iranian nuclear program "runs wide and deep," Grossi told the Jerusalem Post. "Disrupting them would require overwhelming and devastating force." Tehran and Washington have recently engaged in Oman-mediated nuclear talks. Iran is set to hand a counter-proposal for a nuclear deal to the United States via Oman, Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday, in response to a U.S. offer that Tehran deems "unacceptable". Last week, U.S. President Donald Trump said he had warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to take actions that could disrupt nuclear talks with Iran. "I told him this would be inappropriate to do right now because we're very close to a solution now," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "That could change at any moment." Trump and Netanyahu are expected to speak over the phone on Monday. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Paraguay president's X account likely hacked in Bitcoin scheme
Paraguay president's X account likely hacked in Bitcoin scheme

Straits Times

time2 hours ago

  • Straits Times

Paraguay president's X account likely hacked in Bitcoin scheme

Paraguay's President Santiago Pena speaks during an interview with Reuters, in Asuncion, Paraguay August 21, 2024. REUTERS/Cesar Olmedo/File Photo ASUNCION - Paraguay's government on Monday said that President Santiago Pena's X account had likely been hacked after the leader appeared to promote trading of cryptocurrency Bitcoin. "The president's official X account has presented irregular activity which suggests possible unauthorized entry," the government said in a statement. A post on Pena's account in English, with a Spanish-language statement purporting to be from the government, had declared that the Latin American country had made Bitcoin legal tender and that it would roll out a $5 million Bitcoin-backed reserve fund. The government asked citizens to ignore posts from the account until official confirmation was made available. Paraguay's national cybersecurity team was working with X to investigate the situation, the government added. X did not immediately respond to a request for comment. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Explainer-What is the High Seas Treaty to protect world oceans?
Explainer-What is the High Seas Treaty to protect world oceans?

Straits Times

time2 hours ago

  • Straits Times

Explainer-What is the High Seas Treaty to protect world oceans?

General view of the opening of the third UN Ocean Conference Monday, June 9, 2025 in Nice, France. Laurent Cipriani/Pool via REUTERS LONDON - While many countries have agreed to take steps to protect the vast, ungoverned swathes of the world's oceans, they have yet to see their High Seas Treaty go into effect. This week's U.N. Oceans Conference in the French city of Nice hopes to change that. WHAT IS THE HIGH SEAS TREATY? The treaty, signed in 2023, provides a legal framework for creating marine protected areas on the "high seas", or the ocean areas that lie beyond any national jurisdiction. Currently, less than 3% of the oceans are under some form of protection, although altogether the world's oceans cover two-thirds of the planet. The treaty contains 75 points covering areas such as protecting, caring for and ensuring responsible use of marine resources, and includes a provision for requiring environmental impact assessments of any economic activities in international waters. The treaty also aims to ensure that all countries have fair and equitable access to the ocean's resources. While it is widely referred to as the High Seas Treaty, officially it is called the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Treaty. As of Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron said 50 countries had ratified the treaty, with 60 needed for it to go into effect. Separate to the High Seas Treaty, countries agreed under a 2022 U.N. biodiversity pact to put 30% of their territorial waters under conservation. WHY DO WE NEED AN OCEAN TREATY? Oceans support coastal economies and livelihoods through tourism, fishing, shipping, mining, offshore energy and more. Oceans also absorb about a third of the world's carbon dioxide, or CO2 - the primary gas driving climate change - while ocean-swimming phytoplankton provide about half of the world's oxygen. But marine life is now struggling, and human industry and development are almost entirely to blame. More than 1,500 ocean plants and animals are now at risk of extinction, and that number is expected to rise amid ongoing pollution, overfishing, ocean warming and acidification, according to scientists at the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Additionally, new threats to ocean organisms and ecosystems could emerge in coming years in the form of deep-sea mining for rare-earth minerals. In Nice, Macron is expected to urge countries to support postponing sea-bed exploration while researchers work to understand deep sea ecosystems. Scientists are also concerned about the possibility that governments could look to modify ocean chemistry to boost its capacity for absorbing CO2 - a scenario that researchers say could help to limit global warming but could also have unintended consequences. WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS FOR THE TREATY? Macron's news on Monday of 50 governments having ratified the treaty means it is still short by 10 signatures. The treaty will enter into force 120 days after 60 countries have ratified it. Work then begins on setting up institutions and committees to implement the treaty, while its signatories expect to hold a first conference within a year. Despite its involvement in the original treaty negotiations, the United States under current President Donald Trump is not expected to ratify the treaty. WHAT ELSE IS HAPPENING AT THE U.N. OCEANS CONFERENCE? Macron is co-hosting this third U.N. Oceans conference with Costa Rica, and with at least 55 heads of state, business leaders and civil society groups expected to attend the five-day event. Aside from discussions to advance the treaty, delegates are also expected this week to discuss overfishing, water pollution and other threats to marine life. They'll also be looking for fresh ideas on how to pay for it all - with ocean-linked financing lagging far behind other sustainable investment areas. For the five years spanning 2015-2019, ocean-related spending totalled $10 billion. By comparison, the U.N. estimates that every year at least $175 billion is needed for marine protection. The last U.N. oceans summit was held in Lisbon and co-hosted by Kenya in 2022. The next, co-hosted by Chile and Korea, is set for 2028. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store