logo
Amid ICE sweeps, judges are protecting the rights of immigrants

Amid ICE sweeps, judges are protecting the rights of immigrants

Washington Post4 hours ago

The Trumpian vision of the U.S. immigration system is dramatic and nightmarish: clots of agents showing up at schools, government offices, courthouses, workplaces and homes, dressed in the jackets of an alphabet soup of agencies, sometimes masked, often armed. They scoop up undocumented immigrants and ship them off to wherever they came from — or to whatever godforsaken place will take them, if for a price.
But the federal government is a hulking iceberg of bureaucracy, and deep inside its wounded guts, a quieter force persists: Even with the layoffs, buyouts, cutbacks and frequent storms of executive commands, the machine grinds on, dispensing something closer to justice.
In Hyattsville, Maryland, about 12 miles from Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters in D.C., on the sixth floor of a largely unmarked federal office building in the middle of a struggling suburban retail development, the U.S. immigration apparatus is still accepting and protecting newcomers from the chaos created by the president and his SWAT-team-wannabe acolytes.
Across the Potomac River in Virginia, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) ordered state law enforcement to cooperate with the feds, leading to raids on hundreds of immigrants. In the District, Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D), who often spoke of Washington as a 'proud sanctuary city,' has done a 180 and is cooperating with the president's enforcement efforts because there's little she can do to stop ICE, and, as she put it last month, 'this is Donald Trump's America.'
But here in Hyattsville, 16 immigration judges churn through their endless dockets — hundreds of people, handing over reams of paperwork, speaking through tears to emotionless translators and empathetic judges, searching for some way to get legal status, some way to stay in the country that, even now, offers them their best shot.
These immigrants, the great majority of whom arrived illegally, have hit the lottery: They've landed in a courthouse where judges actually seem inclined to help them find a way to stay.
Let's visit Judge Rebecca Niburg's courtroom. Niburg denied asylum to only 35 percent of the people who came before her between 2019 and 2024, which is pretty much on par with her colleagues in Hyattsville but way below the national average of 58 percent.
As the cases flit by, each taking only a few minutes, the stories blur: Yudy Estrada, a Bolivian woman here with her toddler, is having trouble getting records from her hometown that might convince a judge that she would face bodily harm if she went back.
When the judge asks Breyser Medina Gutierrez, a refugee from Colombia who said he illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in September, what country he should be sent to if he's found ineligible for asylum, the man says, 'I don't have any country I would feel safe in except this country.'
Too bad, the judge rules seconds later: 'I will designate Colombia as the country you'll be sent to if you're found to be removable.'
The people coming before Niburg this day are mostly from Venezuela or Colombia. (The only English-speaking immigrant to appear is from Nigeria.)
Dirimo Marin has brought a huge stack of documents to court. It's his application for asylum. The judge leafs through the pile and asks who helped put it together.
'An attorney,' Marin says.
'Probably not an attorney,' Niburg replies. There's no signature on the line where the attorney is supposed to sign — a mistake a legit lawyer probably wouldn't make.
'It's a guy,' Marin concedes. 'He's in Venezuela.'
Marin's next stop is a final hearing on whether he may remain in this country, but Niburg offers to let Marin postpone that day of reckoning.
'How much time do you need?' she asks.
'As much time as you can give me,' Marin replies.
Time for a helpful leading question: 'Is that because you are trying to gather evidence?'
Oh, yeah, that, Marin says. He tells the judge about being struck in the back by authorities back home. The doctor who treated him was in hiding, so there are no records of his injury.
He takes a deep breath and tries for a big extension: 'November?'
Granted. Next case.
Over and over, the same routine, the same stretching out of cases well into next year. The overall vibe here is kindly: The judge patiently explains each step, dispensing advice on how to get asylum applications in order, repeatedly offering to extend the time before their final hearing.
Although these judges work for Attorney General Pam Bondi, their demeanor and approach couldn't be more different. For all the damage Elon Musk's minions have done to the government's ability to serve taxpayers, it marches on, doing its work, if fitfully at times.
Down in the guts of the system, you see how much of the Trump assault is show. He and his devout MAGA appointees would have you believe they are tossing immigrants out of the country at record levels. False. The reigning champion of deportations remains President Barack Obama. The Trump administration would like us to think it pioneered the push to get undocumented immigrants to self-deport. False. As immigrants await hearings in Hyattsville, they're offered a 'self-help guide' titled 'Do You Just Want to Go Home?' It's a handy packet with instructions on how to self-deport — published by the Biden administration.
This is not to say Trump and de facto immigration czar Stephen Miller are playacting. No, Miller has been pushing since his teens to clean foreigners out of the country. He and his fellow policymakers are gleefully stretching the limits of the law, fighting to expand the president's power, skirting due process and putting people on outbound planes.
In response, some immigrants are lying low and some are leaving the country. Among politicians, some erstwhile supporters of newcomers have gone silent and some are groveling before Trump.
But even as ICE agents show up at immigration courts and whisk people into vans that take them to who knows where, the 'deep state' can still push back. Simply by doing their job, feds who know and respect the law can mitigate Trump's lunge for authority and chaos. In federal offices across the country, largely shielded from public view, that's exactly what they're doing.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

NATO commits to higher spending sought by Trump and mutual defense
NATO commits to higher spending sought by Trump and mutual defense

USA Today

time18 minutes ago

  • USA Today

NATO commits to higher spending sought by Trump and mutual defense

While Trump got what he wanted at the brief NATO summit, his allies will be relieved he committed to the fundamental principle of collective defense. THE HAGUE, June 25 (Reuters) - NATO leaders on June 25 backed the big increase in defense spending that President Donald Trump had demanded, and restated their commitment to defend each other from attack. While Trump got what he wanted at the brief summit, tailor-made for him, his NATO allies will be relieved that he committed to the fundamental principle of collective defense after less clear-cut language on June 24. In a five-point statement, NATO endorsed a higher defence spending goal of 5% of GDP by 2035 - a response not only to Trump but also to Europeans' fears that Russia poses a growing threat to their security following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. More: Israel-Iran ceasefire seems to hold as Trump lands in Europe for NATO summit The 32 allies' brief communique added: "We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defense as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – that an attack on one is an attack on all." Asked to clarify his own stance on Article 5, Trump said: "I stand with it. That's why I'm here. If I didn't stand with it, I wouldn't be here." Macron brings up trade war at NATO summit Trump had long demanded in no uncertain terms that for other countries step up their spending on defense to reduce NATO's heavy reliance on the U.S. Despite an appearance of general agreement, French President Emmanuel Macron raised the issue of the steep import tariffs threatened by Trump, and the damage they may do to transatlantic trade, as a barrier to increased defense spending. More: Can Trump pull off peace plans, trade deals at the G7? What to know about the summit "You cannot come to us as allies and ask that we spend more, tell us we will spend more at NATO - and do a trade war. It's an aberration," he told reporters. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who hosted the summit in his home city of The Hague, said NATO would emerge as a 'stronger, fairer and more lethal' alliance. He had earlier acknowledged that it was not easy for European countries and Canada to find the extra money, but said it was vital to do so. "There is absolute conviction with my colleagues at the table that, given this threat from the Russians, given the international security situation, there is no alternative," the former Dutch prime minister told reporters in his home city of The Hague. The new spending target - to be achieved over the next 10 years - is a jump worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the current goal of 2% of GDP, although it will be measured differently. Countries would spend 3.5% of GDP on core defence - such as troops and weapons - and 1.5% on broader defence-related measures such as cyber security, protecting pipelines and adapting roads and bridges to handle heavy military vehicles. All NATO members have backed a statement enshrining the target, although Spain declared it does not need to meet the goal and can meet its commitments by spending much less. More: Trump says US strike impaired Iran's nukes. What does Pentagon say? Live updates Rutte disputes that but accepted a diplomatic fudge with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez as part of his efforts to give Trump a diplomatic victory and make the summit go smoothly. Spain said on June 25 that it did not expect its stance to have any repercussions. Trump meets Zelenskyy after summit Rutte kept the summit and its final statement short and focused on the spending pledge to try to avert any friction with Trump. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had to settle for attending the pre-summit June 24 dinner rather than the main meeting on June 25, although he met Trump separately after the conference ended. The Kremlin on June 24 accused NATO of being on a path of rampant militarization and portraying Russia as a "fiend of hell" in order to justify its big increase in defense spending.

Mushy Wording Lets NATO Commit to Trump's Military Spending Demand
Mushy Wording Lets NATO Commit to Trump's Military Spending Demand

New York Times

time19 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Mushy Wording Lets NATO Commit to Trump's Military Spending Demand

NATO leaders agreed on Wednesday to a goal of spending 5 percent of their gross domestic product on defense. But that doesn't mean each member nation will actually spend that much. The difference lies in a bit of mushy diplomatic language that lets the NATO secretary general, Mark Rutte, claim that he delivered on a spending demand issued by President Trump. The brief and unanimously approved communiqué that NATO issued after leaders wrapped up their annual summit says that 'allies' — not 'all allies' — had agreed to the 5 percent figure. Mr. Trump floated that target, up from the current 2 percent, early this year in a push to have Europe and Canada spend more on their militaries instead of relying on the United States for security. At the time, few believed it was realistic, given that nine of NATO's 32 member countries still had not reached the 2 percent spending pledge that was set in 2014. Several were balking at the 5 percent commitment as recently as Wednesday, emboldened by an assertion last weekend by Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez of Spain that 'we're not going to do it.' Mr. Sanchez said Spain would spend 2.1 percent of its G.D.P. on defense, 'no more, no less,' because that was all his country needed to meet military capability targets set by NATO. Spain currently spends about 1.28 percent of G.D.P. on defense, according to the most recent official figures available. The language compromise, struck between Mr. Sanchez and Mr. Rutte last weekend, let both sides claim victory. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store