logo
Afghan man who worked as interpreter for US Army detained by ICE in San Diego

Afghan man who worked as interpreter for US Army detained by ICE in San Diego

Yahoo14-06-2025
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — An Afghan man who once helped the U.S. military abroad is being held in ICE detention after his arrest Thursday.
It's part of a recent wave of federal courthouse arrests in San Diego and across the country.
Cellphone video obtained by FOX 5/KUSI shows federal agents as they approached the asylum-seeker moments after his first hearing and repeatedly asked him for his name.
The man, who was accompanied by his attorney, refused to answer and agents proceeded to handcuff the man in the hallway of the federal courthouse in downtown San Diego before producing a warrant.
The man stated that he worked with the U.S. military in his home country and has documents to prove it.
His attorney, Brian McGoldrick, confirmed his client was an interpreter for the U.S. Army for three years before the 2021 Taliban takeover.
'He and his brothers had a logistics company in Afghanistan, and they provided a lot of material,' McGoldrick said.
Word of the arrest sent shockwaves through AfghanEvac, a local nonprofit organization dedicated to helping Afghan allies.
'Every message they're sending to Afghans is we don't want you here, get out, which is wild and especially considering how many Veterans care about this. Because if they get sent back, they're dead,' said Shawn VanDiver, President and Founder of AfghanEvac.
VanDiver said the man's wife was previously threatened by the Taliban at a wedding where one of his brother's was murdered.
'So, he fled to Iran. Got to Brazil on a humanitarian visa and walked here from Brazil,' VanDiver added.
'The whole world is watching what's happening with these folks. How is anybody going to stand by us again?' VanDiver said.
Meanwhile, McGoldrick is keeping his client's name confidential for safety reasons, but said he has a pending Special Immigrant visa, no criminal record and was legally paroled into the U.S.
'He finally got an appointment with CBP One and he presented himself at the San Ysidro Port of Entry, I think July 6 of 2024,' said Brian McGoldrick, immigration attorney for the Afghan asylum-seeker.
He said a judge denied the government's motion to dismiss the case.
'The government simply used a statue that allows them to say that his Notice to Appear was improvidently issued,' McGoldrick said.
'That means that the Notice to Appear would've been mistakenly issued,' explained immigration attorney Saman Nasseri.
He explained the approach is becoming more and more common in immigration court.
'The way that they've been justifying arresting people at these hearings is they're dismissing terminating the notices to appear, putting people in expedited removal proceedings,' Nasseri said.
However, McGoldrick said when he asked for more information regarding the Notice to Appear and reasoning behind the request for case dismissal, the government's attorney refused to elaborate.
McGoldrick said he hadn't been able to speak with his client while he's detained in Otay Mesa. He explained that he could remain in custody for months until his asylum hearing in September.
'It's really ICE's discretion to hold him or not,' he added. 'We don't have a relationship with Afghanistan that allows us to return immigrants. It's kind of scary to think that if he were put in expedited removal where would he go?'
FOX 5/KUSI reached out to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for comment but have not heard back.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

New Orleans Mayor Joins Long Line of Louisiana Politicians Accused of Corruption
New Orleans Mayor Joins Long Line of Louisiana Politicians Accused of Corruption

New York Times

time9 minutes ago

  • New York Times

New Orleans Mayor Joins Long Line of Louisiana Politicians Accused of Corruption

Hundred-dollar bills stashed in a freezer. Riverboat casino licenses sold to the highest bidder. Truckloads of granite traded in a quid pro quo. Louisiana has a long and colorful history of political corruption allegations, which for decades have ensnared lawmakers at many levels of government. The most recent was Mayor LaToya Cantrell of New Orleans, who was indicted on Friday after a lengthy federal investigation. According to the charges laid out in the indictment, Ms. Cantrell abused public funds to facilitate a romantic relationship with her bodyguard, a city police officer, and then sought to cover up the personal time they spent together in New Orleans and on out-of-state trips while he claimed to be on duty. Ms. Cantrell's lawyer said on Friday that he needed to review the indictment before commenting; he declined to comment again on Saturday. Here's a look back at some of the most significant corruption scandals in Louisiana history: Richard Leche After the assassination of Huey Long, a popular Louisiana governor turned United States senator, in 1935, Richard Leche emerged as his successor. But Mr. Leche's single term as governor came to an early end when he resigned in 1939 amid corruption allegations. His resignation failed to stave off charges, and in 1940, he was convicted of mail fraud in a plot that prosecutors said involved a dealer selling trucks to the state's Highway Department at excessively high prices, and then giving Mr. Leche a kickback. He served five years in prison before President Harry S. Truman pardoned him in 1953. Huey and Earl Long Earl Long, the lieutenant governor under Leche in 1939, was swept into the state's highest office when his predecessor resigned. Mr. Leche's scandals loomed over Mr. Long's first term, and in 1940, Long was himself charged with embezzlement. The charges didn't stick, however, and Mr. Long would go on to win the governorship in two elections, holding office from 1948 to 1952 and from 1956 to 1960, in a career defined by personal excess and eccentric behavior. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Urban Deployments Raise Questions: What Is Our Military For?
Urban Deployments Raise Questions: What Is Our Military For?

Forbes

time9 minutes ago

  • Forbes

Urban Deployments Raise Questions: What Is Our Military For?

As noted in a recent report by the Center for American Progress, in 2022 Donald Trump stated that 'the next President should use every power at his disposal to restore order — and, if necessary, that includes sending in the National Guard or the troops' to conduct law enforcement activities on U.S. soil. In 2023, said that if restored to office, that he he would send troops to U.S. cities to combat crime: 'The next time, I'm not waiting. … We don't have to wait any longer.' Ominously, the president has talked of using troops to combat 'the enemy within." That time has come. Earlier this year the Trump administration deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles to deal with immigration protests. At the time, California Attorney General Rob Bonta said 'We don't take lightly to the president abusing his authority and unlawfully mobilizing California National Guard troops.' The new target of troops deploying to a U.S. city is in Washington, DC. On Saturday August 16th West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrissey annnounced a plan to deploy hundreds of National Guard member of his state's National Guard to Washington, DC, stating that 'West Virginia is proud to stand with President [Donald]The question is why? Violent crime in Washington, DC is projected to be down 26% this year from 2024. The demonstrations in Los Angeles were overwhelmingly peacaful until the show of force – police, National Guard and Marines – prompted clashes between protesters and military and law enforcement officials. Local law enforcement officers have gone so far as to fire munitions that have left both protesters and journalists injured. Many veterans have taken exception to the deployments, and some have filed an amicus brief in support of California Governor Gavin Newsom's opposition to the troop presence. One of them, Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, said 'This is the politicisation of the armed forces. It casts the military in a terrible light." President Trump's rationale for sending troops into U.S. cities is the Insurrection Act of 1807, which does indeed allow the president to deploy troops for domestic law enforcement in the event of an insurrection. But neither the immigration protests in Los Angeles nor the crime rate in DC qualify as an insurrection, by any stretch of the imagination. The deployments are deeply disturbing, and should be questioned by our elected leaders across the spectrum, along with veterans and average citizens concerned about federal overreach. Questions about the troop deployments need to be louder and more persistent. This is not a partisan issue. It is a basic issue about the role of the. military in a democracy. We can't afford to ignore it and go about business as usual.

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