
After living in the US for 35 years and raising 3 citizens, these parents got deported to Colombia. Their kids want them back
Gladys and Nelson Gonzalez have called the United States home since 1989. Their three daughters, now grown, were all born and raised in California.
The couple led Bible studies at their Southern California church and volunteered at food pantries during the Covid-19 pandemic.
'For nearly four decades, they have built a life here — raising three daughters, giving back to their community, and recently welcoming their first grandchild,' their daughter Stephanie Gonzalez wrote on a GoFundMe page for the family. 'Now, they are being treated as criminals.'
Last month, the parents checked in at an immigration court in Santa Ana, just 'like they have been doing since 2000,' Stephanie wrote in an email to CNN.
But this check-in ended with a much different outcome.
The couple was arrested and handcuffed during their February 21 appointment and put in federal custody, where they spent three weeks before being deported to Colombia.
'They did expect that they would need to depart and were planning to do so, but not in the way that it happened,' said Monica Crooms, an Orange County-based immigration attorney who started working with the couple in 2018.
'We didn't expect that they would be apprehended and held in custody. And again, it's not really unique to them anymore. It's happening across the country,' Crooms told CNN, pointing to recent immigration policy changes in the US two months into the current administration.
The Gonzalezes spent many years searching for a viable path to citizenship, paid their taxes and never had any trouble with the law, according to Crooms and their daughters.
Ideally, the couple would have been given time to get their affairs in order and say goodbye to their daughters and grandchild, according to Crooms. But that didn't happen.
'We had to go and pick up their car from the parking lot and didn't get to say goodbye,' Stephanie said.
Gladys and Nelson came to the United States without authorization in 1989, according to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement statement dated March 14. They had no visas when they arrived, Crooms said, but were granted permission to apply for asylum. The couple was fleeing crime in their native Colombia, according to Crooms and their daughter Stephanie.
In 2000, the immigration court found no legal reason that would allow Gladys and Nelson to stay in the United States and they were issued a voluntary departure order, which gives people a certain amount of time to leave the country at their own expense to avoid a deportation order, according to ICE.
'They were looking for a way to legalize their status in in the way that was available to them at the time in the '90s,' Crooms said. 'Unfortunately, they fell victim to predatory immigration practices that were pretty flagrant.'
The Gonzalezes did not plan to leave the United States after the order was issued, according to Crooms, who said the couple's attorney at the time misled them that the order could be appealed and possibly lead to eventual legalization.
'After seeing other attorneys, they quickly learned that they were in a very precarious situation with respect to their immigration status,' Crooms added. The couple has spent thousands of dollars on legal counsel over the years, and some of those they hired turned out not to be immigration attorneys at all, Crooms said.
Gladys, 55, and Nelson, 59, 'exhausted all legal options to remain in the U.S. between March 2000 and August 2021, including reviews by the Board of Immigration Appeals in 2001 and 2018, Citizenship and Immigration Services in 2010, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in 2021,' ICE said in a statement.
For two decades, the couple remained under an order of supervision, Crooms added. Through the Department of Homeland Security, the program allows those with removal orders to remain in the United States and check in at least once a year while they prepare to leave the country.
The couple's deportation officer 'had not pushed for them to depart until 2018,' leveling with them that it was time to leave the country if their status couldn't be legalized, Crooms said.
When the Gonzalezes fled Colombia's capital city, they feared for their lives.
'At the time my parents left Bogota, the city and country was known as the murder capital of the world,' Stephanie wrote. 'They fled the rampant drug violence that they were forced to live in.'
After Nelson filed for asylum, the couple became 'victims of egregious immigration fraud by their initial attorney,' their daughter told CNN.
'Their initial 'attorney' wasn't even an attorney, and took their money and then their office shut down for a criminal investigation,' Stephanie said.
'Immigration law was rampant with fraud during the late 80s and early 90s, and my parents' next couple attorneys were disbarred. Getting citizenship is difficult, and my parents only had one opportunity to refile paperwork that the initial 'attorney' filed incorrectly.'
For the past 25 years, 'my parents were in the court system and appealing for another opportunity due to 'ineffective counsel,' Stephanie said. 'This Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal dismissed the Petition for Review in 2022.'
Under US immigration law, those living illegally in the country can take legal steps to avoid removal, according to ICE. 'However, once they have exhausted all due process and appeals, the aliens remain subject to a final order of removal from an immigration judge and ICE must carry out that order,' the agency said.
But the couple's daughter and attorney stress the Gonzalezes were treated unfairly during the removal process.
'My parents loved this country, sacrificed all of their money to try to gain citizenship, but were failed by the system,' Stephanie told CNN. 'They should've, at worst, been given the dignity to settle their affairs and fly themselves back to a country they haven't lived in since the 1980s, and not thrown into a detention center that is just another name for a jail, without any knowledge of when they'd be released.'
Gladys and Nelson were separated and put in ICE custody for about three weeks, at detention facilities in California, Arizona and Louisiana, according to Crooms. Their deportation was delayed partially because of a government error, she said.
'The Department of Homeland Security lost their passports,' Crooms said. The Colombian government had to provide DHS with travel documents that would allow the couple to be removed, she added.
The couple's daughters are still holding out hope their parents will be able to return to the United States one day, Stephanie said. Right now, the family is focused on helping Gladys and Nelson acclimate to life in Colombia.
'We've been able to raise $65,000 to help my parents rebuild their new life in Colombia but also to pay for the best attorneys so that one day they can come back,' she added.
The couple can't come back to the United States for at least 10 years because of a 1996 law that says anyone who has been in the country illegally for a year or more, and does not follow an order of voluntary departure, is subject to a bar, Crooms said.
'I think they will be able to come back. I just — I don't foresee that being within the next 10 years,' Crooms said. 'And if there is a serious change to the immigration law, then there's no telling.'
Crooms had accompanied the couple to their immigration check-ins every year since 2018, but this year, they didn't ask her to join them. Had they called her, Crooms said, she would have advised them to prepare for departure and get their affairs in order, given the current immigration climate.
'I don't know why they didn't call me. I think they just really felt like everything has been fine in the past,' Crooms said, adding, 'anyone who is on an order of supervision, who has to check in, should anticipate that this is a real possibility for them — that they may be apprehended and removed.'
Both illegal immigrants and permanent residents should also exercise extreme caution when traveling, Crooms said.
The Trump administration's crackdown on immigration violations will continue to impact people such as Gladys and Nelson, Crooms and Stephanie told CNN, along with minority US citizens and immigrants living legally in the United States.
'The amount of people being detained and put into these places is absolutely heartbreaking and I hope this administration would realize the detrimental affect this will have on so many American families,' Stephanie said.
CNN's Alberto Moya and Norma Galeana contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
11 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump charts new territory in bypassing Newsom to deploy National Guard
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump invoked a section of the US code that allows the president to bypass a governor's authority over the National Guard and call those troops into federal service when he considers it necessary to repel an invasion or suppress a rebellion, the law states. California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, has sharply criticized the move, saying state and local authorities have the situation under control and accusing Trump of attempting to create a 'spectacle.' Advertisement The directive, announced by the White House late Saturday, came after some protests against immigration raids turned violent, with protesters setting cars aflame and lighting fireworks, and law enforcement in tactical gear using tear gas and stun grenades. Trump claimed in his executive order that the unrest in Southern California was prohibiting the execution of immigration enforcement and therefore met the definition of a rebellion. Advertisement Legal experts said they expect Trump's executive order to draw legal challenges. On Sunday, Newsom asked the Trump administration to rescind his deployment of the National Guard, saying the administration had not followed proper legal procedure in sending them to the state. Trump said the National Guard troops would be used to 'temporarily' protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and 'other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.' Goitein called Trump's exercise of the statute an 'untested' departure from its use by previous presidents. She said presidents have in the past invoked this section of federal law in conjunction with the Insurrection Act, which Trump did not. The Insurrection Act authorizes the president to deploy armed forces or the National Guard domestically to suppress armed rebellion, riots or other extreme circumstances. It allows US military personnel to perform law enforcement activities - such as making arrests and performing searches - generally prohibited by another law, the Posse Comitatus Act. The last time a president invoked this section of US code in tandem with the Insurrection Act was in 1992, during the riots that engulfed Los Angeles after the acquittal of police officers in the beating of Rodney King. The Insurrection Act has been invoked throughout US history to deal with riots and labor unrest, and to protect Black Americans from the Ku Klux Klan. Advertisement During his 2024 campaign, Trump and aides discussed invoking the Insurrection Act on his first day in office to quell anticipated protests, and he said at an Iowa rally that he would unilaterally send troops to Democratic-run cities to enforce order. 'You look at any Democrat-run state, and it's just not the same - it doesn't work,' Trump told the crowd, suggesting cities like New York and Los Angeles had severe crime problems. 'We cannot let it happen any longer. And one of the other things I'll do - because you're supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in - the next time, I'm not waiting.' Trump's willingness to use the armed forces to put down protests has drawn fierce blowback from civil liberties groups and Democrats, who have said suppressing dissent with military force is a violation of the country's norms. 'President Trump's deployment of federalized National Guard troops in response to protests is unnecessary, inflammatory, and an abuse of power,' Hina Shamsi, director of the National Security Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. 'By taking this action, the Trump administration is putting Angelenos in danger, creating legal and ethical jeopardy for troops, and recklessly undermining our foundational democratic principle that the military should not police civilians.' Goitein said Trump's move to invoke only the federal service law might be calculated to try to avoid any political fallout from invoking the Insurrection Act, or it's merely a prelude to doing so. 'This is charting new ground here, to have a president try to uncouple these authorities,' Goitein said. 'There's a question here whether he is essentially trying to deploy the powers of the Insurrection Act without invoking it.' Advertisement Trump's move also was unusual in other ways, Goitein said. Domestic military deployments typically come at the request of a governor and in response to the collapse of law enforcement control or other serious threats. Local authorities in Los Angeles have not asked for such help. Goitein said the last time a president ordered the military to a state without a request was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators. Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck wrote on his website that invoking the Armed Services Act - and not the Insurrection Act - means the troops will be limited in what role they will be able to perform. 'Nothing that the President did Saturday night would, for instance, authorize these federalized National Guard troops to conduct their own immigration raids; make their own immigration arrests; or otherwise do anything other than, to quote the President's own memorandum, 'those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary to ensure the protection and safety of Federal personnel and property,'' Vladeck wrote. Rachel E. VanLandingham, a former Air Force attorney and professor at the Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles, echoed the point. Unless acting under federal orders from the president, National Guard units are state organizations overseen by governors. While under state control, Guard troops have broader law enforcement authorities, VanLandingham said. In this situation, the service members under federal control will have more restraints. 'But it can easily and quickly escalate to mortal and constitutional danger,' she said, if Trump decides to also invoke the Insurrection Act, which would give these Guard members and any active-duty troops who may be summoned to Los Angeles the authority to perform law enforcement duties. Advertisement During his first term as president, Trump suggested invoking the Insurrection Act to deal with protests over the 2020 police killing of George Floyd, but his defense secretary at the time, Mark T. Esper, objected and it never came to fruition. Trump asked the governors of a handful of states to send troops to D.C. in response to the Floyd protests there. Some governors agreed, but others turned aside the request. National Guard members were present outside the White House in June of that year during a violent crackdown on protesters demonstrating against police brutality. That same day, D.C. National Guard helicopters overseen by Trump's Army secretary then, Ryan McCarthy, roared over protesters in downtown Washington, flying as low as 55 feet. An Army review later determined it was a misuse of helicopters specifically designated for medical evacuations. Trump also generated controversy when he sent tactical teams of border officers to Portland, Oregon, and to Seattle to confront protesters there.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Train service between Moscow and North Korea's Pyongyang to resume this month, says Russia
(Reuters) -Russia and North Korea plan to restart a direct passenger train service between Moscow and the North Korean capital Pyongyang this month for the first time since 2020, Russia's state-owned rail monopoly said on Monday. Russian Railways said it had agreed with North Korea's railways ministry to resume a twice-monthly service between the two capitals on June 17, a journey it said took eight days and which, at over 10,000 km (6,213 miles), was the longest direct rail journey in the world. Another service between Pyongyang and Khabarovsk, a Russian city close to China's northeastern border, will restart two days later. The services will be operated by Korean State Railway, the state operator, and in the case of the Moscow-Pyongyang route will see a North Korean passenger railcar hitched to the regular Moscow-Vladivostok service and then re-attached to another train. Passenger rail traffic between Russia and North Korea was suspended in February 2020 at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Moscow and Pyongyang have since ratcheted up cooperation, including in the military sphere since President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty last year. North Korea confirmed in late April that it had sent more than 10,000 troops and weapons to Russia to assist in its war in Ukraine, aid which proved crucial for Moscow in recapturing Russia's western Kursk region from Ukraine. The two countries already operate a passenger rail service between Vladivostok in Russia's Far East and Rason, a North Korean port city. The nations are also linked by freight rail networks, although Russia does not disclose the size of the cargo traffic.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Could L.A. ICE Riots Stop the BET Awards? Here's All the Tea
As ICE and the U.S. National Guard continues to ravage the city of Los Angeles, one of the most anticipated events of the year could be in danger of getting shut down. The BET Awards is set to take place Monday (June 9), but many folks fear President Donald Trump's recent antics will spill over to the Black award show. What started as peaceful protests against Trump's unlawful immigration raids quickly took a violent turn after the president sent the National Guard to L.A. without the governor's approval. Over the weekend, the violence escalated resulting in destroyed property, fires and tear gas being thrown at civilians… And who wants to throw a party in the middle of a riot? Organizers for the annual BET Awards insist the ongoing violence will have no impact on the show. In a statement to The Hollywood Reporter, a spokesperson said, 'BET remains committed to the safety of our guests and staff. We are working closely with LAPD and monitoring the situation.' Despite organizers' confidence that the event will go on, many folks online noted just how insane this past weekend has been for the city. 'LA so crazy and random right now,' @NapKingColeP said on X. 'ICE raids, national guard, protesting, BET Awards weekend, and the gay pride parade.' @_itsmelimel added there's 'sooo much sh*t goin on in LA.' She continued, 'ICE protests are going on and ppl are outsideeee celebrating the BET Awards. I am overstimulated.' One TikToker said right now, Los Angeles is very 'dystopian.' @itsneyha added, 'L.A. is continuing to hustle and bustle with DOTY performances and celebrities all in town for the BET Awards while there are literally protests closing down the 101 [freeway].' Widespread violence has taken over the city, and it's going exactly to Trump's plan. The president is set on looking 'tough' as his nation-wide crackdown on immigration continues. He and Calif. Gov. Gavin Newsom have previously come to blows over the state's known sanctuary cities– a city that limits cooperation with ICE and other federal immigration agencies– and now, their beef has reached a new level. Trump took to his favorite social media platform Truth Social on Monday to call for even more violence against protesters. 'Looking really bad in L.A. BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!' he said. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth came out echoing Trump's sentiments. He threatened, 'If violence continues, active-duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert.' He added in a separate tweet 'The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE.' Meanwhile, Gov. Newsom announced plans to sue the administration over the Guard deployment and state's rights, according to CBS News. As of now, the 2025 BET Awards will go on as scheduled starting at 8 p.m. ET Monday night.