ICE detention Archives - Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq.

Denaturalization, Green Cards, Detention & Asylum Fees

Martha Arias — Sat, 20 Jun 2026 00:03:31 +0000

New Immigration Enforcement Changes in 2026: What Families, Green Card Applicants, Asylum Seekers, and Naturalized Citizens Should Know

Important Immigration Updates Are Affecting Many Families

Immigration law continues to change quickly, and several recent federal developments are now drawing serious attention from immigrant families, green card applicants, asylum seekers, and naturalized U.S. citizens.

The U.S. Department of Justice has increased its focus on denaturalization cases. USCIS has issued a policy memorandum emphasizing that adjustment of status is discretionary and may be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. DHS and ICE have also announced expanded detention capacity and enforcement resources. At the same time, asylum applicants may now face new fee requirements, including an annual asylum fee for certain pending cases.

These changes do not mean that every person with an immigration case is in danger. They also do not mean that every naturalized citizen, green card applicant, or asylum seeker will be affected in the same way.

But they do mean that people should be more careful, more informed, and more organized when dealing with immigration matters.

In this article, I want to explain these developments in plain language and offer practical tips for families who may be concerned.

1. The Federal Government Is Increasing Denaturalization Enforcement

Denaturalization is the legal process where the government asks a federal court to revoke a person’s U.S. citizenship after naturalization.

This is a very serious process. Citizenship is not taken away automatically. The government must bring a case, and the case must go through the legal system.

Recent Department of Justice announcements show that denaturalization has become a stronger enforcement priority in certain cases. DOJ has recently filed denaturalization actions against naturalized citizens accused of serious offenses, including terrorism-related concerns, war crimes, sexual offenses, fraud, drug-related offenses, and other serious allegations.

The Department of Justice has also issued internal guidance directing its Civil Division to prioritize denaturalization proceedings in cases permitted by law and supported by evidence. The stated priorities include national security concerns, terrorism, espionage, war crimes, human rights violations, gang activity, serious undisclosed felonies, human trafficking, sex offenses, violent crimes, financial fraud, and cases involving alleged fraud or material misrepresentation in the naturalization process.

It is important to be precise: filing a denaturalization action does not mean the person has already lost citizenship. The government must prove its case.

What Naturalized Citizens Should Understand

Naturalized U.S. citizens should be aware that the government may review whether citizenship was lawfully obtained. Cases that may raise concern often involve:

Alleged fraud or misrepresentation during the immigration or naturalization process
Concealment of material facts
Failure to disclose certain criminal history
Use of false identity documents
Concealment of prior immigration violations
Serious criminal convictions
National security or terrorism-related allegations
War crimes, human rights violations, or related accusations

For most naturalized citizens who were truthful and eligible when they became citizens, this development should not create immediate fear.

But for anyone who had a complicated immigration history, prior arrests, name changes, old removal issues, or concerns about what was disclosed in past applications, it may be wise to speak with an immigration attorney before responding to any government inquiry.

2. USCIS Is Taking a Stricter View of Adjustment of Status

USCIS has issued a policy memorandum stating that adjustment of status is a matter of discretion and administrative grace. Adjustment of status is the process that allows certain eligible people already in the United States to apply for lawful permanent residence without leaving the country for consular processing.

This new policy does not mean that all adjustment of status applications are automatically denied. It also does not mean that every green card applicant must leave the United States.

However, it does show that USCIS officers are being directed to look more carefully at whether adjustment should be granted as a favorable exercise of discretion.

That is an important shift.

Even when a person appears eligible for a green card, USCIS may examine the full record, including immigration history, prior entries, unauthorized employment, overstays, criminal history, fraud concerns, public safety concerns, national security concerns, and other discretionary factors.

Why This Matters

For many families, adjustment of status has been the preferred path because it may allow the applicant to remain in the United States while the green card case is pending.

If USCIS takes a stricter view, some applicants may face more questions, more requests for evidence, longer review, or a greater risk that USCIS may determine adjustment is not appropriate in that person’s case.

For some applicants, consular processing abroad may become part of the discussion. Consular processing can carry risks, especially for people who may have unlawful presence, prior immigration violations, prior removals, misrepresentation issues, or possible waiver needs.

Before filing an adjustment of status application, applicants should understand not only whether they are technically eligible, but whether there are any facts that may cause USCIS to exercise discretion against them.

3. ICE Detention Capacity and Enforcement Resources Are Expanding

The Department of Homeland Security has publicly discussed expanded detention capacity and increased enforcement resources. DHS has stated that recent funding provides ICE with enough detention capacity to maintain a much larger average daily detained population and adds new detention beds.

ICE detention remains one of the most serious areas of immigration enforcement because detention can affect people with pending immigration court cases, prior removal orders, criminal history, recent arrests, or other enforcement priorities.

Detention can also create urgent challenges for families because once a person is detained, the case may move quickly, communication becomes harder, and important documents may be difficult to gather.

Who May Be at Higher Risk?

The facts of each case matter, but people may face a higher risk of detention if they have:

A prior order of removal
Missed immigration court hearings
Certain criminal arrests or convictions
Recent encounters with immigration enforcement
Pending removal proceedings
Prior deportation or unlawful reentry issues
Problems with immigration supervision or check-ins
Outstanding warrants or unresolved criminal matters

Not every person with a pending immigration case is at the same level of risk. However, families should be prepared. It is better to organize documents before an emergency happens.

4. New Asylum Fees May Affect Pending Cases

Another important development involves asylum fees.

Official government fee pages now list asylum-related fees, including a $100 initial Form I-589 fee and a $102 Annual Asylum Fee for certain pending asylum applications. The annual fee applies to certain cases that have been pending for one year or more, and the rules may depend on whether the case is pending with USCIS or before EOIR in immigration court.

For immigration court cases, EOIR states that the Immigration Judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals will provide a written order regarding payment of the Annual Asylum Fee.

For USCIS asylum cases, USCIS has stated that applicants must timely pay the Annual Asylum Fee after notification and that USCIS may reject a pending Form I-589 asylum application if the fee is not timely paid.

This is especially important because many asylum cases remain pending for long periods of time. Applicants should not ignore official notices about payment, deadlines, or fee instructions. Missing a required payment may create serious problems for a pending case.

What Asylum Applicants Should Do

Asylum applicants should carefully monitor:

Mail from USCIS
Mail from the immigration court
Online USCIS account notices, if applicable
Attorney correspondence
Payment deadlines
Hearing notices
Address updates

If you move, you must make sure your address is properly updated with the correct agency. Many immigration problems begin not because the person ignored the case, but because important notices were sent to an old address.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Dedicated Immigration Law Attorney

If you are concerned about adjustment of status, consular processing, asylum fees, ICE detention, naturalization, or a prior immigration filing, you may contact our office to schedule a consultation.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

Practical Tips for Immigrants and Families Right Now

These updates can feel overwhelming, but there are practical steps families can take.

Tip 1: Keep Copies of Every Immigration Filing

Keep a complete copy of every immigration application ever filed for you or by you. This may include:

Naturalization applications
Green card applications
Asylum applications
Work permit applications
Family petitions
Waiver applications
Consular processing documents
Immigration court filings
Prior notices from USCIS, ICE, CBP, EOIR, or the Department of Justice

If you do not have copies, try to gather what you can before there is an emergency.

Tip 2: Do Not Guess on Immigration Forms

Immigration forms ask serious questions. A wrong answer, incomplete answer, or misunderstood question can create long-term problems.

If you do not understand a question, do not guess. Ask for legal guidance before filing.

Tip 3: Review Criminal History Before Filing

Even old arrests can matter.

Sometimes people believe a case “does not count” because it was dismissed, sealed, expunged, or happened many years ago. Immigration law may treat criminal records differently than state criminal law.

Before filing for a green card, citizenship, asylum, or another benefit, review your full record with an immigration attorney.

Tip 4: Be Careful Before Traveling

Travel can create problems for some people with pending cases, prior unlawful presence, removal history, or unresolved immigration issues.

Before leaving the United States, speak with an immigration attorney, especially if you have a pending green card case, asylum case, TPS, parole, DACA, or prior immigration violations.

Tip 5: Do Not Ignore Government Notices

If you receive a letter from USCIS, ICE, EOIR, CBP, or the Department of Justice, do not ignore it.

Deadlines can be short. Some notices require a response, payment, appearance, or legal action.

Tip 6: Update Your Address Correctly

If you move, update your address with the correct immigration agency. Depending on your case, this may include USCIS, EOIR, ICE, or more than one agency.

Do not assume that updating your address with one office automatically updates it everywhere.

Tip 7: Prepare a Family Emergency File

Every immigrant family should consider keeping a secure emergency file with:

Copies of passports
A-numbers
Immigration receipts
Court hearing notices
Attorney contact information
Medical information
School information for children
Important family documents
Trusted emergency contacts

This is not about fear. It is about preparation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the government take away U.S. citizenship from a naturalized citizen?

In some cases, the government may bring a denaturalization case in federal court. This usually involves allegations that citizenship was obtained unlawfully, fraudulently, or through concealment of important facts. Citizenship is not revoked automatically. The government must pursue the case through the legal system.

Should all naturalized citizens be worried?

No. Most naturalized citizens who were eligible and truthful during the process should not assume they are at risk. However, anyone with concerns about old immigration filings, criminal history, identity issues, or possible mistakes in prior applications should seek legal advice before responding to any government inquiry.

Does the new USCIS policy mean adjustment of status is no longer available?

No. Adjustment of status still exists. However, USCIS is emphasizing that adjustment is discretionary and may be granted only when the applicant qualifies and when USCIS believes the case deserves favorable discretion. Applicants should be more careful before filing.

Will more green card applicants have to go through consular processing?

Possibly, depending on the facts of the case. The new policy may lead to closer review of adjustment of status applications, and in some cases, consular processing may become more likely. But this does not apply the same way to every person. Some applicants may still qualify for adjustment of status in the United States.

Is consular processing risky?

It can be risky for some people. Applicants with unlawful presence, prior removals, fraud concerns, criminal history, or waiver issues may face complications when they leave the United States. Before choosing consular processing, it is important to understand the risks.

Are asylum applicants now required to pay new fees?

Certain asylum applicants may now be required to pay fees, including an initial Form I-589 fee and an Annual Asylum Fee for certain pending cases. The exact requirement may depend on whether the case is pending with USCIS or EOIR and how long the case has been pending.

What happens if an asylum applicant does not pay a required fee?

Failure to timely pay a required asylum fee may create serious problems for the pending application. USCIS has stated that it may reject pending Form I-589 asylum applications if the Annual Asylum Fee is not timely paid after notice. For immigration court cases, EOIR states that an Immigration Judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals will provide a written order regarding payment.

Can ICE detain someone with a pending immigration case?

Yes, depending on the facts. A pending case does not always prevent detention. Risk may be higher for people with prior removal orders, missed hearings, criminal issues, or recent enforcement encounters.

What should I do if a family member is detained by ICE?

Try to gather the person’s full name, date of birth, country of birth, A-number, location of detention, immigration history, criminal history, and copies of any immigration papers. Contact an immigration attorney quickly because detention cases may move fast.

Should I file an immigration application now or wait?

That depends on your case. Some people should move forward; others should first review risks, prior filings, criminal history, travel history, and eligibility. Immigration strategy should be based on facts, not fear.

Why Legal Guidance Matters More Than Ever

Immigration law has always required careful preparation, but these recent changes make preparation even more important.

A person may be eligible for an immigration benefit and still face problems if the case is not presented correctly. A family may believe a case is simple, but old travel history, prior visa entries, criminal records, public charge questions, misrepresentation concerns, or missed deadlines can change the strategy.

Before filing, responding, traveling, or attending an interview, it is wise to understand the full picture.

At Arias Villa, PLLC, we help individuals, families, business owners, professionals, and immigrants understand their options and prepare immigration matters carefully. Every case is different, and the right strategy depends on the facts.

Legal Disclaimer

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law changes frequently, and every case depends on its own facts. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, please consult with a qualified immigration attorney.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney

If you are concerned about adjustment of status, consular processing, asylum fees, ICE detention, naturalization, or a prior immigration filing, you may contact Arias Villa, PLLC to schedule a consultation.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

The post Denaturalization, Green Cards, Detention & Asylum Fees appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Federal Appeals Courts Push Back on Expanded Mandatory Immigration Detention Without Bond Hearings

Martha Arias — Wed, 13 May 2026 16:55:55 +0000

Another Federal Appeals Court Rejects Expanded Mandatory Immigration Detention Without Bond Hearings

A new federal appeals court decision has added another important development to the national debate over immigration detention, bond hearings, and due process.

On May 11, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a published decision in Lopez-Campos, et al. v. Raycraft, et al. The court affirmed several district court decisions granting habeas petitions to detained noncitizens who argued that the government had unlawfully denied them access to bond hearings. The petitioners were detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), but they argued that their detention should instead be governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which can allow release on bond or conditional parole while removal proceedings are pending.

This decision is especially important because the Sixth Circuit joined the Second Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit in rejecting the government’s broader interpretation of mandatory detention. It was the third federal appeals court decision rejecting the government’s position that certain noncitizens already living inside the United States may be held under § 1225(b)(2)(A) without access to an individualized bond hearing.

Why This Decision Matters

Immigration detention can have serious consequences for families. A person may be separated from children, spouses, work, medical care, and community support while their immigration case continues.

That is why the legal authority used to detain a person matters. Some detention laws are mandatory. Other detention laws allow a person to ask for bond. A bond hearing does not guarantee release, but it gives the person an opportunity to present evidence about family ties, community ties, work history, lack of danger, and likelihood of appearing at future hearings.

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), certain applicants for admission must be detained for removal proceedings if an examining immigration officer determines they are not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted.

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), the government may arrest and detain a noncitizen pending a decision on removal, but that provision also permits release on bond or conditional parole, except where mandatory detention rules apply. The Sixth Circuit described § 1226 as the detention framework for many noncitizens already inside the United States while their removal proceedings are pending.

The key question in these cases is whether a person who entered without inspection and has already been living inside the United States can be treated as someone still “seeking admission” under § 1225(b)(2)(A), or whether that person falls under § 1226 and may request bond.

The Government’s Position Came From a 2025 BIA Decision

The government’s position was strengthened by a September 5, 2025 decision from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), Matter of Yajure Hurtado. In that precedential decision, the BIA held that immigration judges lack authority to hear bond requests or grant bond to people who are present in the United States without admission.

The BIA reasoned that people present in the United States without admission are applicants for admission under § 1225(b)(2)(A) and must be detained for the duration of their removal proceedings.

That interpretation represented a major shift from what several federal courts described as a long-standing practice of allowing many people in this situation to seek bond under § 1226(a). The Eleventh Circuit noted that, for nearly thirty years, the answer had generally been that unadmitted noncitizens found inside the United States were eligible for bond while going through immigration proceedings, but that DHS took a different view in 2025.

What the Sixth Circuit Decided

In Lopez-Campos, the Sixth Circuit rejected the government’s argument.

The court explained that U.S. immigration law authorizes detention under different statutory frameworks. It noted that § 1225(b)(2)’s mandatory detention scheme applies to certain noncitizens who seek admission into the country, while § 1226 applies to other noncitizens pending a decision on removability, with exceptions.

The Sixth Circuit stated that hundreds of district courts and five other federal circuits had already addressed this statutory question. It then expressly joined the Second and Eleventh Circuits in holding that § 1225(b)(2)(A) does not apply to noncitizens like the petitioners in that case.

The petitioners in the Sixth Circuit case were people who had lived in the United States for years. Many were parents of U.S. citizen children. They were arrested by immigration authorities inside the United States and were denied bond because immigration judges concluded they lacked authority to grant bond under the BIA’s interpretation. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district courts’ rulings in favor of the petitioners.

The Eleventh Circuit Decision Matters Deeply for Florida

For families in Florida, the Eleventh Circuit decision is especially important because the Eleventh Circuit covers Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.

On May 6, 2026, the Eleventh Circuit issued its decision in Hernandez Alvarez v. Warden, Federal Detention Center Miami. The court framed the issue clearly: whether unadmitted noncitizens found in the interior of the United States are eligible for bond while going through immigration proceedings.

The Eleventh Circuit rejected the government’s reinterpretation of § 1225(b)(2)(A). It held that the statute’s no-bond detention rule is limited to applicants for admission who are “seeking admission,” and that the petitioners in that case were not seeking lawful entry when they were detained after traffic stops.

This does not mean every detained person in Florida will be released. But it may be very important for certain people detained in Florida who were denied bond because the immigration court believed it had no authority to consider bond.

The Second Circuit Reached a Similar Result

The Second Circuit also rejected the government’s position in Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden. In that case, the court held that § 1225(b)(2)(A) did not apply to a noncitizen who was already present in the United States after entering without inspection and who was not apprehended while seeking admission. The court concluded that detention was governed by § 1226(a), not § 1225(b)(2)(A).

The Second Circuit also made an important clarification: its decision did not disturb mandatory detention for people apprehended while entering the country or shortly thereafter, and it did not disturb mandatory detention under § 1226(c) for certain criminal or terrorism-related grounds. Instead, the ruling concerned people already present inside the United States who may be eligible for bond under § 1226(a).

What This Decision Does Not Mean

This decision does not give anyone legal status. It does not cancel removal proceedings. It does not mean that every detained person must be released. It does not guarantee bond.

A bond hearing is an opportunity to ask for release while the immigration case continues. At that hearing, the person may need to show that they are not a danger to the community and that they are likely to appear for future immigration court hearings.

The Sixth Circuit also recognized that not all federal appeals courts agree on this issue. It noted that other circuits have addressed the same statutory question and reached different conclusions. Because of that disagreement, this area of law may continue to develop.

Why Families Should Pay Attention

If someone you love is detained by immigration authorities, the legal basis for detention should be reviewed carefully.

This decision may matter if the person has been living inside the United States, was detained by ICE or immigration authorities away from the border, was denied bond because the immigration judge said there was no authority to grant bond, or was treated as subject to mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A).

However, every case is different. Some people may still be subject to mandatory detention under other provisions, including certain criminal-related detention provisions. The Laken Riley Act also amended § 1226 in 2025 to add mandatory detention language for certain inadmissible noncitizens charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admitting acts related to specified offenses.

For this reason, families should not assume that one court decision automatically applies to every detained person. The facts, location of detention, immigration history, criminal history, prior orders, pending relief, and federal circuit all matter.

Practical Steps for Families

If a loved one is detained, families should begin gathering documents immediately. Helpful documents may include:

proof of identity,
immigration court paperwork,
the Notice to Appear,
custody documents,
prior immigration decisions,
proof of residence,
marriage certificates,
children’s birth certificates,
medical records,
employment records,
tax records where available,
letters of support,
proof of community ties, and
evidence showing that the person is not a danger and is likely to attend future hearings.

These documents can be important in a bond request. They can also help an attorney determine whether habeas relief, a renewed bond request, or another legal step may be appropriate.

Final Thoughts

This decision is important because it reminds us that immigration detention is not only a matter of enforcement. It is also a matter of statutory limits, due process, and individualized review.

The Sixth Circuit did not say that immigration detention is unlawful in every case. It did not order a blanket release of detained immigrants. But it did reject the government’s attempt to apply § 1225(b)(2)(A) to certain noncitizens already living inside the United States in a way that would deny them access to bond hearings.

For families, this distinction can be very meaningful. A bond hearing may be the first opportunity to explain who the person is, how long they have lived here, whether they have family and community support, and why they should be allowed to continue their immigration case outside detention.

If you or a loved one is facing immigration detention or removal proceedings, it is important to speak with an immigration attorney as soon as possible.

For immigration guidance, you may contact my office at 305-671-0018.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Contact us today with your immigration questions.

With a passion for immigration law and a commitment to client advocacy, Immigration Law Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq. provides the experienced legal representation for U.S. citizenship, employment and business visas, specialized on investor visas, green card petitions, deportation defense, and more. Schedule a consultation with the attorney today to discuss your immigration needs.

MIAMI OFFICE:
ARIAS VILLA, PLLC
Address: 9100 S Dadeland Blvd, #510
Miami, FL 33156
Phone: (305) 671-0018
Mobile: (305) 233-3110
Email: martha@ariasvilla.com

OFFICE HOURS:
Monday: 9 AM – 5:30 PM
Tuesday: 9 AM – 6 PM
Wednesday: 9 AM – 6 PM
Thursday: 9 AM – 5:30 PM
Friday: 9 AM – 3 PM
Saturday: Closed
Sunday: Closed

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Immigration Law Attorney with Decades of Experience

For professional and dedicated immigration law services in Miami, reach out to our immigration attorney Martha Arias and her team at Arias Villa, PLLC. Schedule your consultation today and let us help you achieve your immigration goals.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Immigration law changes quickly, and the outcome of any case depends on the facts, the law, the court, the person’s immigration history, and the jurisdiction where the case is pending.

The post Federal Appeals Courts Push Back on Expanded Mandatory Immigration Detention Without Bond Hearings appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Know Your Rights if I.C.E. Stops You in Public!

Martha Arias — Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:55:56 +0000

Know Your Rights if I.C.E. Stops You in Public

All people living in the United States, including undocumented immigrants, have certain U.S. Constitutional rights. If you are undocumented and immigration (I.C.E.) officers stop you on the street or in a public place, know you have the following rights:

You have the right to remain silent.

You do not need to speak to the immigration officers or answer any questions.

You may ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says “No”, you may exercise your right to remain silent.
If you ever asked “Where you were born?” or “How you entered the United States, you may refuse to answer or remain silent.
If you choose to remain silent, say so out loud.
You may refuse to show identity documents that say what country you are from.
Do not show any false documents and do not lie.

You have the right to speak to a lawyer.

You do not need to speak to the immigration officers or answer any questions.

If you are detained or taken into custody, you have the right to immediately contact a lawyer.

Even if you do not have a lawyer, you may tell the immigration officers that you want to speak to a lawyer.
If you have a lawyer, you have the right to talk to them. If you have a signed DHS Form G-28, which shows you have a lawyer, give it to an officer.
If you do not have a lawyer, ask an immigration officer for a list of pro bono lawyers.
You also have the right to contact your consulate. The Consulate may be able to assist you in locating a lawyer.
You can refuse to sign any/all paperwork until you have had the opportunity to speak to a lawyer.
If you choose to sign something without speaking to a lawyer, be sure you understand exactly what the document says and means before you sign it.

You may refuse a search.

If you are stopped for questioning but are not arrested, you do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, but an officer may “pat down“ your clothes if he or she suspects you have a weapon.

For additional information please contact us.

The post Know Your Rights if I.C.E. Stops You in Public! appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..