Fact check: How does ICE determine whether a lawful permanent resident is deportable?

1. Summary of the results

ICE determines whether a lawful permanent resident is deportable through a formal legal process that begins with serving a Notice to Appear, which lists the specific reasons the government believes the person is deportable ^[1]. The government must then prove their case through "clear and convincing evidence" that the person can be deported ^[1].

The primary grounds for deportability include:

• Criminal convictions - particularly crimes involving moral turpitude within five to ten years of admission that result in a sentence of at least one year in jail ^[2]
• Immigration fraud or misrepresentation in obtaining the green card ^{[2] [3]}
• Failure to comply with immigration laws, including visa overstays ^{[4] [2]}
• National security concerns ^{[1] [3]}
• Abandonment of U.S. residency ^[3]

The process involves final orders of removal and the exhaustion of due process rights, as demonstrated in Ward Sakeik's case, where she had a final order of removal since 2011 and her appeal was dismissed in 2014 ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses reveal several important contextual factors not addressed in the original question:

• Wrongful detentions occur - Junior Dioses spent 48 days in an ICE facility despite his attorney arguing that his prior convictions did not meet the standard for deportable offenses under immigration law ^[2]. This demonstrates that ICE's initial determinations can be challenged and overturned.
• Protective measures exist - Green card holders can protect their status by avoiding criminal offenses, filing U.S. taxes regularly, and being honest on immigration forms ^[3]. This suggests that deportability is often preventable through compliance.
• Due process rights are significant - The requirement for "clear and convincing evidence" and the appeals process provide substantial protections, as seen in cases where individuals successfully challenge ICE's determinations ^{[1] [2]}.
• Timing matters - Some deportable offenses have specific timeframes, such as crimes involving moral turpitude that must occur within five to ten years of admission ^[2].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself does not contain misinformation or bias - it is a straightforward inquiry about ICE procedures. However, the question's framing could benefit from acknowledging that:

• The deportation process involves judicial oversight and due process protections, not just administrative ICE decisions ^[1]
• Appeals and legal challenges are integral parts of the system, as demonstrated by the cases of both Ward Sakeik and Junior Dioses ^{[4] [2]}
• The determination process can result in wrongful detentions that are later corrected through legal proceedings ^[2]

The question assumes ICE has unilateral authority to determine deportability, when in reality the process involves immigration courts, judges, and extensive legal procedures with multiple opportunities for challenge and appeal.