Immigrants still detained as ICE persists with deportations despite legal wins.

R.V. had already spent six months in a California detention facility when, in June, an immigration judge ruled in his favor. He told the court he escaped Cuba in 2024 after joining anti-government demonstrations, which led to his imprisonment, surveillance, and harassment. After being kidnapped in Mexico, he crossed into the United States without authorization and asked border officials for protection, saying he feared for his life. The judge granted him relief from removal to Cuba, and the 21-year-old expected to soon reunite with family in Florida.

But R.V.who requested anonymity to avoid retaliationhas not been released. He said detention staff have warned him they will seek to deport him somewhere else, mentioning countries such as Panama or Costa Rica. The waiting is unbearable, he said. It feels like they refuse to accept that I won.

According to immigration attorneys, R.V.s situation reflects a growing pattern in which people who secure protection from being returned to their home countries nevertheless remain detained for prolonged periods. Many remain in custody while the federal government appeals decisions or searches for alternative countries willing to accept them. Although the Department of Homeland Security generally has 90 days to identify a third country, such removals were historically uncommon, and people were usually released within the U.S.

This pattern has shifted under the Trump administration. Recent internal directives instruct Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to avoid discretionary releases. A June 24 memo states that field offices no longer have the option to discretionarily release aliens.

The cases involve immigrants who receive withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture. These forms of relief require meeting higher standards of proof than asylum and do not provide a path to citizenship. Unlike asylum, which blocks deportation to any country, these protections only prevent return to a place where the individual faces harm or torture.

Jennifer Norris of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center said the governments current approach undermines these safeguards. Were in a dangerous moment, she said. These clients won in court, yet they remain locked up and treated like criminals.

Laura Lunn of the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network noted that because double-jeopardy protections do not apply, the government can appeal any ruling it loses. By filing an appeal, they can keep a person detained for months or even years, she said.

Some attorneys argue the government is using extended detention as leverage to pressure people into giving up their claims. One such detainee is a Vietnamese man who identified himself only by his nickname, Nga, meaning horse. Detained in California since March, he fled Vietnam after, he said, police tortured him when he refused to pay extortion disguised as a protection fee. An immigration judge denied him asylum but granted him protection under the torture convention. His lawyers are appealing the asylum denial.

Through an interpreter, Nga said he chose the United States because he believed other countries would not protect him from being returned to Vietnam. Instead, he now fears being sent to an unfamiliar country. He said ICE officers regularly ask detainees if they wish to self-deport. Im scared theyll send me somewhere else, he said. But Im also afraid Ill be stuck here for years.

Federal regulations allow continued detention if officials believe removal is likely in the foreseeable future. Such cases have become more common since a June Supreme Court ruling expanded immigration authorities ability to send people to countries with which they have no ties. Following the decision, ICE issued guidance requiring at least 24 hours notice before a third-country transfer, or as little as six hours in emergencies. The agency must also obtain diplomatic assurances that individuals will not face persecution or torture.

The Trump administration has reached agreements with several nationsincluding Ghana, El Salvador, and South Sudanto receive deportees. Trina Realmuto of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance said this has led to more people being held while the government searches for a third country willing to accept them. She is among the attorneys challenging the practice in court.

Realmuto noted that federal law requires DHS to first attempt removal to a country with some personal connection to the individual before resorting to any willing nation. She said the administration is bypassing that requirement. In some cases, people removed to third countries have been sent onward to the very places they originally fled.

One example is Rabbiatu Kuyateh, a 58-year-old woman who left Sierra Leones civil war decades ago and lived in Maryland. Because a judge prohibited her return to Sierra Leone, ICE deported her to Ghanawhere officials then forcibly transported her back to Sierra Leone.

In fiscal year 2024, 2,506 people received protection under withholding of removal or the torture convention, according to the Congressional Research Service. Realmuto said many thousands who have received such relief over the years could now be vulnerable to renewed detention as the government attempts third-country removals.

Another case involves F.B., a 27-year-old Colombian woman who entered the U.S. in 2024 through the San Ysidro port of entry. She won protection under the torture convention in February, but instead of releasing her, Homeland Security sought to remove her to Honduras, Guatemala, or Brazil. Her attorneys filed a federal petition in September arguing that her prolonged detention violated the law.

Although ICE told the court it had arranged a flight for her to Bolivia, she remained detained a month later. U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt ultimately ordered her release, ruling that the governments claim of imminent removal had proven false and that her continued detention violated constitutional protections.

This article was originally published by the Los Angeles Times.

Analysis: Prolonged Detention Despite Legal Protection

The case of R.V. is not an isolated incident but rather a reflection of a growing issue in the U.S. immigration system. Despite securing legal protection from deportation, many individuals like R.V. remain detained for extended periods, awaiting potential deportation to third countries. This trend has been accelerating since the Trump administration’s shift in policy, which limits the discretion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in releasing detainees. The June 24 memo, which states that field offices no longer have the option to release individuals discretionarily, marks a clear change in immigration practices.

The legal protections available to individuals under the Convention Against Torture or withholding of removal, though not offering a path to citizenship, are designed to prevent deportation to countries where individuals may face harm or torture. However, as seen in R.V.’s case, even those granted such protections often find themselves stuck in detention for prolonged periods as the government searches for a third country willing to accept them.

One notable development in the U.S. immigration system is the growing reliance on third-country removals. Following a Supreme Court ruling in June, ICE expanded its ability to deport individuals to countries with no direct connection to them. This has led to longer detentions, as the government seeks diplomatic agreements with nations such as Ghana, El Salvador, and South Sudan to receive deportees. Unfortunately, this policy sometimes results in individuals being sent to countries where they have no ties and could face the very persecution they fled in the first place.

Furthermore, federal law requires that removal efforts prioritize sending individuals to countries with which they have some personal connection before considering other nations. However, this requirement is increasingly being bypassed. The case of Rabbiatu Kuyateh, who was sent to Ghana only to be forcibly returned to Sierra Leone, highlights the risks of these policies. Similarly, F.B., a Colombian woman granted protection under the torture convention, was instead subjected to prolonged detention and attempts to deport her to other countries such as Honduras or Brazil, despite her legal protections.

These growing patterns reflect an alarming shift in U.S. immigration practices, undermining the protections that individuals are entitled to under international law. The increasing use of third-country removals and prolonged detention raises serious legal and ethical concerns, particularly for individuals who have already won their cases in court.

Sources:

• Despite court wins, immigrants stay detained as ICE seeks to deport them