Your fact-checks will appear here
Nonprofits decide whether to seek relief in immigration court or federal district court.
James “Jim” Joseph Rodden has been identified by the Texas Observer as an ICE assistant chief counsel who prosecutes deportation cases in Dallas, where he represents the government in removal proceedi...
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) treats "removals" and "returns" as distinct categories of repatriation: removals are formal actions that carry administrative (and sometimes criminal) penalti...
enjoy most constitutional protections of citizens but remain removable under a broad set of statutory grounds — criminal convictions, fraud, long absences, certain immigration violations, and vague or...
Recent court rulings and administration actions in 2024–2025 have substantially expanded the government’s tools to remove noncitizens by: allowing termination of certain temporary legal statuses that ...
The in the United States is a multi‑agency operation that spans federal law enforcement, , diplomatic channels, detention contractors, and non‑governmental actors who provide legal aid or track remova...
are administrative, civil processes distinct from : they are initiated by immigration authorities, use different standards of proof, and generally do not carry the full panoply of criminal procedural ...
by screening cases, preparing bond motions and , filing in immigration and federal courts, and providing essential evidence and procedural support to increase chances of release . They combine ready-m...
before and during under a statutory scheme that is both broad and segmented: some categories of people face mandatory detention while others are subject to discretionary detention with possible bond o...
shifted noticeably from FY2024 to FY2025: judges issued removal or voluntary departure orders at higher rates in 2025 (about 45% of completed cases) than in 2024 (about 39%), driving a sharp rise in r...
During , deportations were driven by a mixed system in which formal removals often required a court order but an expanding set of DHS-led "nonjudicial" removal mechanisms and prioritization memos shar...
Immigration removal proceedings are governed by constitutional due process principles—most centrally the Fifth Amendment—which courts and agencies interpret to require notice, an opportunity to be hea...
The methodological distinction hinges on authority, procedure, and consequence: a DHS or ICE “removal” is the compulsory transfer of a noncitizen based on a final order of removal and carries administ...