
Immigration officers intensify arrests in courthouse hallways on a fast track to deportation
SEATTLE: A transgender woman who says she was raped by Mexican cartel members told an immigration judge in Oregon that she wanted her asylum case to continue. A Venezuelan man bluntly told a judge in Seattle, 'They will kill me if I go back to my country.' A man and his cousin said they feared for their lives should they return to Haiti.
Many asylum-seekers, like these three, dutifully appeared at routine hearings before being arrested outside courtrooms last week, a practice that has jolted immigration courts across the country as the White House works toward its promise of mass deportations.
The large-scale arrests that began in May have unleashed fear among asylum-seekers and immigrants accustomed to remaining free while judges grind through a backlog of 3.6 million cases, typically taking years to reach a decision. Now they must consider whether to show up and possibly be detained and deported, or skip their hearings and forfeit their bids to remain in the country.
The playbook has become familiar. A judge will grant a government lawyer's request to dismiss deportation proceedings. Moments later, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers — often masked — arrest the person in the hallway and put them on a fast track to deportation, called 'expedited removal.'
President Donald Trump sharply expanded fast-track authority in January, allowing immigration officers to deport someone without first seeing a judge. Although fast-track deportations can be put on hold by filing a new asylum claim, people can be swiftly removed if they fail an initial screening.
'People are more likely to give up'
The transgender woman from Mexico, identified in court filings as O-J-M, was arrested outside the courtroom after a judge granted the government's request to dismiss her case.
She said in a court filing that she crossed the border in September 2023, two years after being raped by cartel members because of her gender, and had regularly checked in at ICE offices, as instructed.
O-J-M was taken to an ICE facility in Portland before being sent to a detention center in Tacoma, Washington, where attorney Kathleen Pritchard said in court filings she was unable to schedule a nonrecorded legal phone call for days.
'It's an attempt to disappear people,' said Jordan Cunnings, one of O-J-M's attorneys and legal director of the nonprofit Innovation Law Lab. 'If you're subject to this horrible disappearance suddenly, and you can't get in touch with your attorney, you're away from friends and family, you're away from your community support network, that's when people are more likely to give up and not be able to fight their cases.'
O-J-M was eligible for fast-track deportation because she was in the United States less than two years, but that was put on hold when she expressed fear of returning to Mexico, according to a declaration filed with the court by ICE deportation officer Chatham McCutcheon. She will remain in the United States at least until her initial screening interview for asylum, which had not been scheduled at the time of the court filing, the officer said.
The administration is 'manipulating the court system in bad faith to then initiate expedited removal proceedings,' said Isa Peña, director of strategy for the Innovation Law Lab.
The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, did not respond to questions about the number of cases dismissed since last month and the number of arrests made at or near immigration courts. It said in a statement that most people who entered the US illegally within the past two years are subject to expedited removals.
'If they have a valid credible fear claim, they will continue in immigration proceedings, but if no valid claim is found, aliens will be subject to a swift deportation,' the statement said.
The Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review, which runs the immigration courts, declined to comment.
ICE has used increasingly aggressive tactics in Los Angeles and elsewhere while under orders from Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, to increase immigration arrests to at least 3,000 a day.
Tension in the hallways
In Seattle, a Venezuelan man sat in a small waiting room, surrounded by others clutching yellow folders while a half-dozen masked, plainclothes ICE officers lined the halls.
Protesters held signs in Spanish, including one that read, 'Keep faith that love and justice will prevail in your favor,' and peppered officers with insults, saying their actions were immoral.
Judge Kenneth Sogabe granted the government's request to dismiss the Venezuelan man's deportation case, despite his objections that he and his wife faced death threats back home.
'I want my case to be analyzed and heard. I do not agree with my case being dismissed,' the man said through an interpreter.
Sogabe, a former Defense Department attorney who became a judge in 2021, told the man that Department of Homeland Security lawyers could dismiss a case it brought but he could appeal within 30 days. He could also file an asylum claim.
'When I leave, no immigration officer can detain me, arrest me?' the man asked.
'I can't answer that,' the judge replied. 'I do not have any connection with the enforcement arm.'
The man stepped out of the courtroom and was swarmed by officers who handcuffed him and walked him to the elevators.
Later that morning, a Haitian man was led away in tears after his case was dismissed. For reasons that were not immediately clear, the government didn't drop its case against the man's cousin, who was released with a new hearing date.
The pair entered the United States together last year using an online, Biden-era appointment system called CBP One. Trump ended CBP One and revoked two-year temporary status for those who used it.
Alex Baron, a lawyer for the pair, said the arrests were a scare tactic.
'Word gets out and other people just don't come or don't apply for asylum or don't show up to court. And when they don't show up, they get automatic removal orders,' he said.
At least seven others were arrested outside the Seattle courtrooms that day. In most cases, they didn't speak English or have money to hire a lawyer.
A judge resists
In Atlanta, Judge Andrew Hewitt challenged an ICE lawyer who moved to dismiss removal cases against several South and Central Americans last week so the government could put them on a fast track to deportation.
Hewitt, a former ICE attorney who was appointed a judge in 2023, was visibly frustrated. He conceded to a Honduran man that the government's reasoning 'seems a bit circular and potentially inefficient' because he could show he's afraid to return to his country and be put right back in immigration court proceedings.
The Honduran man hadn't filed an asylum claim and Hewitt eventually signed what he called a 'grossly untimely motion' to dismiss the case, advising the man of his right to appeal.
He denied a government request to dismiss the case of a Venezuelan woman who had filed an asylum application and scheduled a hearing for January 2027.
Hewitt refused to dismiss the case of a young Ecuadorian woman, telling the government lawyer to put the request in writing for consideration at an August hearing. Immigration officers waited near the building's exit with handcuffs and took her into custody.
Hashtags

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


Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Americans split on Trump's use of military in immigration protests, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
WASHINGTON: Americans are divided over President Donald Trump's decision to activate the military to respond to protests against his crackdown on migrants, with about half supportive of the move, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday. Some 48 percent of respondents in the two-day poll agreed with a statement that the president should 'deploy the military to bring order to the streets' when protests turn violent, while 41 percent disagreed. Views on the matter split sharply along partisan lines, with members of Trump's Republican Party overwhelmingly backing the idea of calling in troops while Democrats were firmly opposed. At the same time, just 35 percent of respondents said they approved of Trump's response to the protests in Los Angeles, which has included sending National Guard troops and US Marines to the city and also threatening to arrest Democratic officials, including the governor of California. Some 50 percent of people in the poll said they disapproved of Trump's response. Trump has argued the military deployment in Los Angeles was needed due to protests there following a series of immigration raids in the city. Some of the demonstrations in Los Angeles have turned violent — leaving burned out cars on city streets — and 46 percent of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said protesters opposing Trump's immigration policies had gone too far, compared to 38 percent who disagreed with that view. The protests have spread to other US cities including New York, Chicago, Washington and San Antonio, Texas — all of which have large immigrant populations and tend to vote for Democrats rather than Republicans. Trump campaigned and won last year's election on a promise to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants and Reuters/Ipsos polls have shown that his support on immigration policy has been consistently higher than on other matters, such as his stewardship of the US economy. The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which surveyed 1,136 Americans nationwide and has a margin of error of about 3 percentage points, showed wide support for increased deportations. Some 52 percent of respondents — including one in five Democrats and nine in 10 Republicans — backed ramping up deportations of people in the country illegally. Still, 49 percent of people in the poll said Trump had gone too far with his arrests of immigrants, compared to 40 percent who said he had not done so. The most heated protests have taken place in Los Angeles County, where one in three residents are immigrants and about half of people born abroad are naturalized US citizens, according to US Census estimates. Nationwide, Americans took a generally dim view of Trump's threats to arrest Democratic officials like California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. Just 35 percent of respondents said Trump should order arrests of state and local officials who try to stop federal immigration enforcement.


Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
Trump administration hit with second lawsuit over restrictions on asylum access
MCALLEN, Texas: Immigration advocates filed a class-action lawsuit Wednesday over the Trump administration's use of a proclamation that effectively put an end to being able to seek asylum at ports of entry to the United States. The civil lawsuit was filed in a Southern California federal court by the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, the American Immigration Council, Democracy Forward and the Center for Constitutional Rights. The lawsuit is asking the court to find the proclamation unlawful, set aside the policy ending asylum at ports of entry and restore access to the asylum process at ports of entry, including for those who had appointments that were canceled when President Donald Trump took office. Unlike a similar lawsuit filed in February in a Washington, D.C., federal court representing people who had already reached US soil and sought asylum after crossing between ports of entry, Wednesday's lawsuit focuses on people who are not on US soil and are seeking asylum at ports of entry. US Customs and Border Protection did not respond to a request for comment, but the agency does not typically comment on litigation. The Department of Homeland Security, another agency among the listed defendants, did not respond to a request for comment either. Trump's sweeping proclamation issued on his first day in office changed asylum policies, effectively ending asylum at the border. The proclamation said the screening process created by Congress under the Immigration and Nationality Act 'can be wholly ineffective in the border environment' and was 'leading to the unauthorized entry of innumerable illegal aliens into the United States.' Immigrant advocates said that under the proclamation noncitizens seeking asylum at a port of entry are asked to present medical and criminal histories, a requirement for the visa process but not for migrants who are often fleeing from immediate danger. 'Nothing in the INA or any other source of law permits Defendants' actions,' the immigrant advocates wrote in their complaint. Thousands of people who sought asylum through the CBP One app, a system developed under President Joe Biden, had their appointments at ports of entry canceled on Trump's first day in office as part of the proclamation that declared an invasion at the border. 'The Trump administration has taken drastic steps to block access to the asylum process, in flagrant violation of US law,' the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies stated in a press release Wednesday.


Arab News
12 hours ago
- Arab News
45 minutes to pack up a lifetime as Pakistan's foreigner crackdown sends Afghans scrambling
TORKHAM, Afghanistan: The order was clear and indisputable, the timeline startling. You have 45 minutes to pack up and leave Pakistan forever. Sher Khan, a 42-year-old Afghan, had returned home from his job in a brick factory. He stared at the plainclothes policeman on the doorstep, his mind reeling. How could he pack up his whole life and leave the country of his birth in under an hour? In the blink of an eye, the life he had built was taken away from him. He and his wife grabbed a few kitchen items and whatever clothes they could for themselves and their nine children. They left everything else behind at their home in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Born in Pakistan to parents who fled the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the ensuing war, Khan is one of hundreds of thousands of Afghans who have now been expelled. The nationwide crackdown, launched in October 2023, on foreigners Pakistan says are living in the country illegally has led to the departures of almost 1 million Afghans already. Pakistan says millions more remain. It wants them gone. Leaving with nothing to beat a deadline 'All our belongings were left behind,' Khan said as he stood in a dusty, windswept refugee camp just across the Afghan border in Torkham, the first stop for expelled refugees. 'We tried so hard (over the years) to collect the things that we had with honor.' Pakistan set several deadlines earlier this year for Afghans to leave or face deportation. Afghan Citizen Card holders had to leave the capital Islamabad and Rawalpindi city by March 31, while those with Proof of Registration could stay until June 30. No specific deadlines were set for Afghans living elsewhere in Pakistan. Khan feared that delaying his departure beyond the deadline might have resulted in his wife and children being hauled off to a police station along with him a blow to his family's dignity. 'We are happy that we came (to Afghanistan) with modesty and honor,' he said. As for his lost belongings, 'God may provide for them here, as He did there.' A refugee influx in a struggling country At the Torkham camp, run by Afghanistan's Taliban government, each family receives a SIM card and 10,000 Afghanis ($145) in aid. They can spend up to three days there before having to move on. The camp's director, Molvi Hashim Maiwandwal, said some 150 families were arriving daily from Pakistan — far fewer than the roughly 1,200 families who were arriving about two months ago. But he said another surge was expected after the three-day Islamic holiday of Eid Al-Adha. Aid organizations inside the camp help with basic needs, including health care. Local charity Aseel provides hygiene kits and helps with food. It has also set up a food package delivery system for families once they arrive at their final destination elsewhere in Afghanistan. Aseel's Najibullah Ghiasi said they expected a surge in arrivals 'by a significant number' after Eid. 'We cannot handle all of them, because the number is so huge,' he said, adding the organization was trying to boost fundraising so it could support more people. Pakistan blames Afghanistan for militancy Pakistan accuses Afghans of staging militant attacks inside the country, saying assaults are planned from across the border — a charge Kabul's Taliban government denies. Pakistan denies targeting Afghans, and maintains that everyone leaving the country is treated humanely and with dignity. But for many, there is little that is humane about being forced to pack up and leave in minutes or hours. Iran, too, has been expelling Afghans, with the UNHCR, the UN's refugee agency, saying on June 5 that 500,000 Afghans had been forced to leave Iran and Pakistan in the two months since April 1. Rights groups and aid agencies say authorities are pressuring Afghans into going sooner. In April, Human Rights Watch said police had raided houses, beaten and arbitrarily detained people, and confiscated refugee documents, including residence permits. Officers demanded bribes to allow Afghans to remain in Pakistan, the group added. Searching for hope while starting again Fifty-year-old Yar Mohammad lived in Azad Kashmir for nearly 45 years. The father of 12 built a successful business polishing floors, hiring several workers. Plainclothes policemen knocked on his door too. They gave him six hours to leave. 'No way a person can wrap up so much business in six hours, especially if they spent 45 years in one place,' he said. Friends rushed to his aid to help pack up anything they could: the company's floor-polishing machines, some tables, bed-frames and mattresses, and clothes. Now all his household belongings are crammed into orange tents in the Torkham refugee camp, his hard-earned floor-polishing machines outside and exposed to the elements. After three days of searching, he managed to find a place to rent in Kabul. 'I have no idea what we will do,' he said, adding that he would try to recreate his floor-polishing business in Afghanistan. 'If this works here, it is the best thing to do.'