Why are Liam and his dad still in detainment if they are here legally
Executive summary
Liam and his father remain in immigration custody not because a court has ordered them deported, but because they are in the middle of an asylum and detention process that federal authorities say gives them grounds for continued custody; a federal judge has blocked any immediate removal or transfer but has not ordered their release while litigation and immigration proceedings continue [1] [2]. Competing accounts about the parents’ entry and the circumstances of the arrest have driven public outrage and legal filings, leaving detention as the default posture until courts or DHS act otherwise [3] [4].
1. The formal reason: pending asylum claims and immigration custody authority
Federal immigration law and ICE practice allow the agency to detain people while their immigration status is adjudicated, and multiple outlets report that the father and son have active asylum claims yet remain in ICE custody as those claims and related litigation proceed [5] [1] [3]. A federal judge has temporarily barred the government from deporting or removing them from the Western District of Texas during the pendency of the court challenge, which prevents immediate deportation but leaves them physically in detention at the Dilley family residential center [2] [1].
2. Conflicting narratives about legality of entry complicate custody decisions
The family’s legal team and several outlets report that the father and child “entered the country legally” and have been pursuing asylum, while DHS and ICE officials in public statements describe the pair as having entered illegally — a factual dispute that matters because agency claims about entry and conduct shape enforcement actions and litigation strategy [3] [6] [7]. Those opposing narratives are central to why release has not been automatic: ICE contends its operation was a targeted arrest of the father and says officers had to take custody of the child for safety reasons, while witnesses and school officials dispute key parts of that account [4] [8].
3. Court intervention paused removal but did not mandate release
A U.S. district judge issued an order preventing deportation or transfer outside the court’s jurisdiction, effectively blocking removal for now, but that relief is narrowly focused on preventing removal rather than ordering the family freed from ICE custody; the judge’s stay thus keeps the father and son in the Texas facility during litigation rather than returning them to Minnesota or releasing them to a sponsor [2] [1]. The litigation the family filed seeks release and other relief, but courts typically balance statutory detention authority, flight risk and safety concerns — meaning a stay of removal is not the same as an order compelling release [2] [1].
4. Humanitarian and health concerns fueling political pressure but not yet changing legal posture
Lawmakers, protesters and child-rights advocates have pressed for immediate release, citing the boy’s reported illness, sleepiness and distress in the Dilley center and alleging family compliance with asylum procedures, which has elevated the case to a political flashpoint [9] [10] [3]. Those political and humanitarian pressures can influence public opinion and prompt oversight, but they do not automatically vacate ICE’s statutory detention authority or substitute for judicial rulings ordering release [10] [3].
5. Why release hasn’t happened yet — a practical synthesis
In short: ICE asserts enforcement grounds and describes operational facts that justify custody in its view, the family maintains they legally entered and are pursuing asylum, and a court has intervened only to block removal and transfers while litigation proceeds — which stabilizes their location in detention without necessarily addressing the merits of release or asylum claims [4] [3] [2]. Reporting indicates the case is now playing out across immigration proceedings, a federal lawsuit and public advocacy, and until a court orders release or DHS decides administratively to free them, detention remains the default outcome [1] [2].