Which advocacy groups or attorneys could assist in locating Lucia Lopez Belloza's immigration case?
Executive summary
If you want help locating Any Lucía López Belloza’s immigration files and pressing for her return, media reporting identifies at least three legal/advocacy actors already involved: attorney Todd Pomerleau (her lead counsel and founder of Mass Deportation Defense) [1], policy director Nayna Gupta at the American Immigration Council who is assisting the family [1] [2], and the American Immigration Council more broadly as an assisting organization [2]. News outlets report Pomerleau has searched government databases and found only a 2017 closure notation while ICE says a 2015 removal order exists [3] [4] [1].
1. Who’s already working the file — named lawyers and groups
Todd Pomerleau is repeatedly identified in reporting as Lopez Belloza’s attorney and the founder of Mass Deportation Defense; he is litigating to return her and says he has not found a record of a 2015 removal order beyond a case-closure entry in 2017 [1] [3]. Nayna Gupta, named as policy director at the American Immigration Council, is explicitly reported as assisting the family [1] [2]. Those three — Pomerleau, Mass Deportation Defense, and the American Immigration Council — are the concrete legal and advocacy touchpoints visible in press coverage to date [1] [2].
2. What these actors can do — and what they’ve already said they’re doing
Pomerleau’s immediate stated goals are to force the federal government to return Lopez Belloza to the U.S. and to challenge what he calls a due‑process violation; he says he’s searched government databases and only found a 2017 closed case entry [3] [5]. The American Immigration Council, through Gupta, is helping the family understand outstanding orders and how they may have gone unnoticed — a policy/advocacy role distinct from courtroom litigation [2].
3. Where official records reportedly disagree — the core evidence gap
ICE and DHS have publicly said an immigration judge ordered Lopez Belloza removed in 2015; Pomerleau says he cannot find a supporting record and only sees a 2017 closure notation in government databases [3] [4] [1]. Multiple outlets report a federal judge issued an emergency order to block removal after her detention, and Pomerleau alleges ICE nonetheless moved and removed her — an allegation at the center of efforts to locate a formal case record and any removal paperwork [6] [7] [8].
4. Other organizations typically helpful in cases like this (reported + plausible)
Reporting names the American Immigration Council as involved [2]. Coverage does not list other specific groups working the case, but common allies in deportation‑challenge litigation often include local legal defense clinics, immigrant‑rights nonprofits and litigation centers; available sources do not mention additional groups by name for this case [2].
5. Practical next steps reporters and advocates are using now
Journalists cite searches of government immigration databases as the first step Pomerleau took; litigation to compel the government to return the client is his stated next move [3] [5]. The family is working with the American Immigration Council on clarifying whether outstanding orders exist and why they may not have been noticed [2]. The combined path is record search → emergency federal filings → public pressure and policy advocacy [1] [6].
6. Conflicting narratives and the stakes
Federal agencies say there was a 2015 removal order and that she “illegally stayed” in the U.S.; the attorney says no proof has been produced and that she was deported despite a judge’s emergency order blocking removal [9] [7]. That conflict defines why locating the administrative or court record is decisive: it would show whether a valid final order existed and when it was entered, or whether procedural errors occurred [3] [4].
7. Limits of current reporting — what sources do not say
Available sources do not publish the underlying immigration‑court docket, the actual removal order text, or government transfer and deportation manifests in full; they also do not name additional legal nonprofits beyond the American Immigration Council working the case [3] [1] [2]. If you need to locate files yourself, reporting does not provide the alien file (A‑file) number or the immigration court case number.
8. If you want to help or to locate the records now
Contact Pomerleau and the American Immigration Council — both are named in coverage as counsel and advocates on the matter [1] [2]. Reporters relied on database searches and emergency federal filings; pursuing Freedom of Information Act requests, court dockets at EOIR (immigration court), and direct demands to ICE/DHS for the A‑file and removal paperwork are the next legal steps described or implied by sources, though those procedural actions are not detailed step‑by‑step in current reporting [3] [6].
Final note: news accounts consistently cite the same three figures and the core factual dispute (a claimed 2015 removal order vs. counsel’s inability to find a record) — locating the A‑file or court docket is the single factual lever that will resolve the disagreement, and the named attorney and the American Immigration Council are the entry points for anyone seeking that documentation [1] [2] [3].