Any Questions?
We are ready to answer all your questions. Just fill the form and we will call you soon.
Third-Country Deportations, Florida License Changes, and the Risks of Misrepresentation
This morning on Radio Libre, I joined journalist Lourdes Ubieta for an important conversation about several immigration issues that are creating anxiety for many families right now: deportations to third countries, changes tied to Florida driver licenses and identification cards, election-related risks for non-citizens, and the very serious consequences of fraud or misrepresentation in immigration matters.
One of the first issues we discussed was the growing concern over removals to third countries. This is an area where people can become confused very quickly, especially when they hear that someone was not returned directly to his or her country of nationality. In some cases, withholding of removal may protect a person from being sent back to one specific country if that person can show a qualifying future danger there. That form of protection is different from asylum, and the legal standards are not identical. USCIS materials make clear that withholding of removal is tied to a higher standard and focuses on the likelihood that the person’s life or freedom would be threatened if returned.
We also talked about the pressure building inside the immigration court system. That concern is understandable. EOIR has continued announcing additional immigration judges and temporary immigration judges, including a public April 8, 2026 update announcing 15 immigration judges and 17 temporary immigration judges. More staffing does not answer every due process concern, but it does signal continued pressure toward faster case movement.
Another subject that deserves public attention is Florida’s HB 991. In the interview, we discussed driving license and identification changes. The current enrolled text states that by July 1, 2027, Florida driver licenses and identification cards issued to qualified applicants must include the applicant’s legal citizenship status as last recorded in the system. The same legislation also includes election-related provisions that many immigrants and mixed-status families should not ignore.
This is where I always urge extra caution. A person should never claim U.S. citizenship on a license application, voter form, immigration filing, or any government document unless that claim is true and legally supported. These mistakes can create long-term immigration damage. In some situations, the damage may go far beyond a delay. USCIS’s current NTA policy is stricter than many people realize, and an unfavorable decision can now place some applicants into removal proceedings where they are no longer lawfully present after the denial.
I also want parents to take one message very seriously: do not assume that a child who grew up in the United States automatically became a U.S. citizen. I have seen too many painful cases where a young adult believed that he or she could vote, register, or answer “yes” to a citizenship question without fully understanding the consequences. Before anyone registers to vote, signs a form, or answers a citizenship question, that person should know exactly what his or her legal status is.
Another point from the interview remains just as important as ever: be careful who prepares your immigration paperwork. A poorly prepared filing is not a small problem. It can affect timing, eligibility, credibility, and, in some cases, future defense options. The cost of a mistake is often much greater than people expect.
If you heard the interview this morning and you are unsure how these developments may affect your case, take the time to review your history carefully before filing anything new. Truthfulness, consistency, and proper legal guidance matter now more than ever.
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship. It is not legal advice. Immigration outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case, and laws, procedures, and agency policies can change.
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA
SPANISH TRANSCRIPT
LOURDES UBIETA:
Bueno, dos temas que quería conversar con ustedes, amigos. Hoy en día subió a dos millones de personas el número de auto deportados desde que la administración del presidente Trump, en ejercicio como el número 47, pues… dos millones de personas se han auto deportado del país. De esos millones que entraron, mayoritariamente en el gobierno del presidente Biden, además de esos dos millones que se han auto deportado, que han decidido irse, también hay un número significativo de personas que han sido deportadas.
Y ha comenzado, dentro de todo este proceso migratorio, la deportación de inmigrantes a terceros países. Y muchos ya comenzaron a llegar a uno de nuestros países, a Costa Rica, ¿no? Un primer grupo de inmigrantes deportados desde Estados Unidos a terceros países llegaron a Costa Rica. Fueron unos 25 de ellos, ciudadanos de Albania, de Camerún, de China, de Guatemala, de Honduras, de India, de Kenia, de Marruecos. Toda esa gente había entrado aquí, amigos oyentes, por la frontera sur. Sabíamos quiénes eran: Camerún, Kenia, Marruecos… bueno, deportados, y llegaron a Costa Rica.
Quiero darle la bienvenida a la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, que está con nosotros a esta hora. Abogada, hace tiempo que no conversábamos. Bienvenida a su casa.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, sí, Lourdes. Días sin conversar. Un gusto hablar con usted y con toda esa audiencia. Y mejor aún, un gusto verla, porque ahora tenemos…
LOURDES UBIETA:
Ahí tenemos a nuestra abogada de inmigración en pantalla, amigos oyentes. Ya no es solo escucharla, sino que la vemos. Un placer, doctora.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, lo mismo. Ya le pusimos cara a la voz, eso es.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Bienvenida como siempre a su casa. Sabe que la apreciamos mucho aquí en Radio Libre y le agradecemos que nos haya acompañado por tanto tiempo en todas estas crisis migratorias que hemos tenido en los últimos tiempos. Y bueno, quería, en primer lugar, conocer su opinión, ¿verdad?, porque las cifras que nos han llegado son de dos millones —el número no es redondo, pero casi— de auto deportados, o sea, personas que han decidido irse del país. Y después entiendo que 900.000, corríjame usted, doctora, si estoy mal, es el número de personas que sí han sido deportadas efectivamente de los Estados Unidos.
Proceso que para algunos es lento, para otros, en medio de tantas personas que hay que procesar, pues… no sé cómo lo ve usted, si le parece que vamos rápido, si le parece que va lento, cómo ve usted este proceso.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo veo que esos datos parecen ser reales y un estimado muy cercano. De pronto pienso que las personas deportadas pueden ser incluso más, si sumamos a aquellas que son deportadas directamente de la frontera, más las que están deportando los jueces. Así que estimo que es bastante cercano ese dato, Lourdes. Y lo que también creo es que esas cantidades aumenten aún más próximamente.
La razón es que están contratando más jueces para estos casos, que son los que llaman jueces temporales. La semana pasada, por ejemplo, recibí un comunicado del departamento de Executive Office for Immigration Review, o como nosotros lo llamamos, EOIR, por sus siglas, que decía que se juramentaron 17 jueces temporales y 19 nuevos jueces. O sea que, si usted suma, son más de 30 jueces juramentados en una semana que van a ejercer, obviamente, funciones de jueces de inmigración para ayudar en estos procesos de deportación masiva que el presidente anunció y que está cumpliendo.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Sí. En el año 2025, la cifra que se está manejando de deportados fue de 600.000. Entre el 20 de enero y el 31 de diciembre de 2025. El año fiscal 2026, que está en curso, que suma solo octubre del 25 a febrero del 26, los jueces de inmigración han emitido 262.021 órdenes de deportación y salidas voluntarias.
También hay arrestos de ICE durante el primer año de la administración de Trump, arrestos realizados por haberse… ¿se acuerda?, o aplicado las salidas voluntarias. En fin, hay un tema que también es la nacionalidad de las personas. Básicamente estamos hablando de nacionales de México, de Guatemala, de Honduras, pero también de otros países africanos, etcétera, etcétera, etcétera.
En este proceso que está en plena, digamos, en plena ejecución, y vemos el uso de los terceros países, abogada, en este caso Costa Rica, cuando una persona es deportada a un tercer país, ¿cuál es el objetivo de eso? ¿Por qué no puede ser deportada a…? Porque aquí hay nacionales de Guatemala y de Honduras. En vez de ser deportada a sus propios países, ¿por qué los deportan a un tercer país como Costa Rica?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, puede ser que a estas personas les fue aprobado un withholding of removal. La mayoría de esos son los casos. El withholding of removal es una deportación que no se ejecuta, se sostiene, porque la persona puede recibir una persecución futura en su país.
Entonces, esa figura del withholding of removal, que es muy parecida a la del asilo… La diferencia es que en el asilo la persona tuvo una persecución pasada y va a tener una persecución futura. En el withholding, la persona va a tener es una persecución futura.
Cuando le dan el withholding a la persona, la persona puede vivir y trabajar en los Estados Unidos, pero el estatuto sí autoriza que esa persona pueda ser enviada a un tercer país que no sea su país de donde pidió el withholding, donde su vida corre peligro, y esto si ese tercer país lo recibe.
Entonces, históricamente, el withholding… esta es la primera vez, por lo menos en mis 23 años que yo llevo como abogada de inmigración, que veo que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos busca ese tercer país, hace el arreglo con ese tercer país y envía a las personas allá. Porque aunque esto sí ha estado en el estatuto siempre, Lourdes, y déjeme aclararlo, porque a veces las personas piensan que esta es la primera vez que ha ocurrido. Sí es primera vez que ocurre, que se envía y que el gobierno haga la gestión. Pero no es que esto no esté en el estatuto y se haya creado del día a la mañana. Esto siempre ha existido en el estatuto, sobre todo para las personas con withholding.
Ahora, el problema aquí, que es donde viene mucho la queja, es que muchas de esas personas que también están siendo enviadas allá no tienen tampoco un withholding. Son personas que vinieron a pedir aquí asilo y su país no las recibe de regreso. Entonces esa es otra situación por la que están mandando estas personas. Entonces es como una combinación de esas personas que tienen withholding y de los que les han negado alguna petición en los Estados Unidos y su país no los recibe de regreso.
No sé por qué se ve que los países que están mandando a Costa Rica, por ejemplo, ahora estos últimos, son de Albania, Camerún, China, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenia, Marruecos. Yo, como usted, me pregunto por qué. ¿Por qué Honduras aquí? Claro, caso de withholding.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Claro, un caso de withholding. Exacto. Bueno, lo interesante es que Costa Rica también está otorgando estatus migratorio a algunos de ellos porque en el 2025 recibieron 200 deportados de Estados Unidos y a 85 les dieron… perdón, de 285, fueron repatriados a sus países de origen, doctora. Es decir, lo que no logro entender es por qué no los repatrian directamente de Estados Unidos a sus países. Imagino que será por lo que usted explica, y no pasar por un tercer país. En definitiva, muchos, en el caso de Costa Rica, se quedan en Costa Rica y les dan un estatus migratorio.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto. Es lo que Costa Rica… Lo que Costa Rica, creo entender, hizo con Estados Unidos es primero tratarlos humanamente y darles vivienda por una semana, revisar sus casos de asilo a ver si califican y, si no, enviarlos a otros países, pero no a países donde vayan a recibir una persecución.
No me imagino… es que a lo último los que hayan sido repatriados a su propio país es que tal vez al fin hicieron algún arreglo con su país, o la persona dijo: “Bueno, me voy a mi país, prefiero irme a mi país que estar aquí”. Quién sabe cómo fue la situación. El punto es que sí les están revisando peticiones de asilo allá, en Costa Rica, a los que apliquen.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Estamos conversando con la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, amigos oyentes, a esta hora con nosotros en vivo. Doctora, en la Florida se van a implementar cambios en las licencias de conducir. Amigos oyentes, atención con esto.
A partir del 1 de enero del 2027 comienza la aplicación de la ley HB 991. Lo hemos conversado en otros programas. Esta ley lo que establece es que todas las licencias e identificaciones emitidas en el estado de la Florida indicarán explícitamente si la persona portadora de esa identificación es ciudadana estadounidense o si posee otro estatus legal. Básicamente van a tener unas letricas que dicen “citizen” o “non-citizen”. Doctora, ¿qué le parece esto?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Me parece… a ver, aquí yo digo: obviamente para el inmigrante que no tenga un estatus legal va a ser problemático, pero no es algo que vaya a causar tanto revuelo, pienso yo, porque hoy en día muchas personas que no tienen un estatus legal igual no pueden obtener la licencia. Los que obtienen la licencia son residentes o ciudadanos o tienen un estatus legal, como alguna visa de turista, digo, de inversionista, de estudiante, cualquier visa que le da ese estatus. Entonces, de pronto no es lo más impactante, porque ya hemos visto que Florida ha sido muy estricta en otorgar licencias a personas sin estatus.
Lo que sí me parece a mí impactante que va a ser es la persona que se haya arriesgado o haya sido tan… bueno, no sé qué palabra usar que no sea una palabra de locura, pero una persona que se haya arriesgado, una persona que tenga la locura de sacar una licencia de conducir diciendo que es ciudadano americano. Ahí sí lo van a coger con una prueba contundente para una posible deportación.
Y déjeme explicarlo, Lourdes. Yo he tenido casos donde la persona ha usado un certificado de nacimiento de una persona de Puerto Rico, por ejemplo, diciendo que es ciudadano americano, y sacan la licencia. Lo que pasa es que a veces es difícil para el gobierno probarle a la persona que hizo eso, porque aunque ese certificado figura en ese archivo de la persona con Florida, con el Departamento de Motores y Vehículos, ahí había formas, sobre todo antes, de lograr una defensa.
Ya cuando usted tiene una licencia de conducir con una foto que diga que es ciudadano americano, si esa persona cometió fraude, ahí sí va a ser súper fácil que el gobierno le pruebe a esa persona el fraude. Entonces aquí yo voy con esto: sí le debería dar mucho temor a aquellos que les gusta hacer esas cosas locas, porque aquí sí va a ser una prueba contundente. Uno.
Dos, otra cosa. Lo que yo pienso: las personas que tienen, sobre todo los jóvenes, Lourdes, los jóvenes, por Dios, o que los papás que nos escuchan les digan a los jóvenes que tengan mucho cuidado en votar en una elección federal, estatal o local sin preguntar siquiera si son ciudadanos o no.
Aunque parezca no lógico, pasa muchísimas veces y lo he visto miles de veces. Porque fíjese usted: un joven llega a los Estados Unidos muy jovencito, de dos años, tres años, qué sé yo. El papá y la mamá son ciudadanos americanos. El joven nunca se hizo ciudadano, pero él tiene en su mente que este es su país, habla inglés perfecto, vive acá y piensa que puede votar. Y llega al colegio y le dicen: “Mira, es hora de registrarse”, no sé qué, y lo registran, como ocurría antes. O quién sabe yo quién lo llama y lo registra, y ese joven vota. Dios mío, ¿cómo le parece? Si ese joven vota, en eso queda registrado como que votó o dijo que era ciudadano americano sin serlo. Y eso es deportación sin derecho a tener un perdón, Lourdes. Eso va deportado de por vida.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Termina en deportación sin derecho a perdón.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
¿Cómo le parece? Entonces aquí es donde digo yo: más aún hoy en día, los jóvenes deben protegerse y tener cuidado, porque ellos van a tener una licencia y no van a poder decir al departamento olímpicamente: “Es que yo soy ciudadano”. Obviamente siempre hay que probarlo, pero tienen que tener todavía más cuidado.
O sea que es una medida que va a impactar muchas cosas en la parte migratoria, pero también aquellos que son amigos de lo no bueno o de lo no correcto tienen que tener todavía más cuidado, porque ahora sí es más difícil.
Lourdes, yo estaba leyendo un resumen de ese proyecto, ese bill, de esa ley que pasó. Fíjese, hay una cosa que me llama la atención dentro de muchas, pero esta tiene que ver también con los inmigrantes, y es que aquellos que vayan a ser candidatos y que tengan doble ciudadanía lo van a tener que expresar también al Departamento de Motores y Vehículos. Eso me suena un poquito complicado. No sé si es que les van a impedir que sean… que sean candidatos. ¿Qué es eso? ¿Por qué se requería? Porque para mí todas las cosas tienen un porqué, ¿cierto? ¿Por qué ese requerimiento?
Yo sé que a nivel federal hay ciertos cargos que una persona que no nació en los Estados Unidos no puede ejercer, como el de la presidencia. Otros cargos sí. Entonces, ¿por qué aquí les van a pedir que publiquen ante el Departamento de Motores y Vehículos su doble ciudadanía?
Otra cosa, eso es para los candidatos que vayan a ser candidatos a un cargo público. Y habla también, dice —y mira, está aquí interesante— a partir de julio 1 se crea un estatuto de limitación de cinco años para las personas que hayan sido acusadas o convictas de una felonía en violación al código electoral. Esto también es algo interesante.
¿Por qué? Porque quiere decir que va a haber un statute of limitations, que quiere decir como una fecha límite en que se pueden presentar cargos en contra de una persona que haya violado el estatuto o el código electoral como felonía. Entonces me parece a mí que en estos cinco años, a partir de julio 1 del 2026 —porque esa parte del bill empieza ahora en julio— las personas que hayan cometido alguna violación en el estatuto electoral van a poder recibir unos cargos de felonía.
Y esto es delicado porque, volviendo al punto de esos jóvenes que no sabían o que no sé qué, pueden recibir esas notificaciones de haber cometido una felonía. ¿Cuál sería el consejo? Hablen con su abogado. Y aquí van a necesitar dos abogados: el abogado penal, el abogado criminalista, y el abogado de inmigración, para que los dos manejen esto de una forma que posiblemente esa persona no tenga unas consecuencias mayores.
Por eso esta empieza a partir de julio. O sea que no solamente tenemos la parte de las licencias de conducir, hay muchas otras cosas que, sobre todo en cuanto a las elecciones y a los candidatos, van a tener también unos efectos muy interesantes, diría yo —no tengo una palabra más específica que “interesantes”— realmente van a ser delicados o sensibles, esa es la palabra, para muchos inmigrantes.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Aquí tengo un oyente que nos dice que la embajada de los Estados Unidos en República Dominicana ha hecho énfasis en decir la verdad y no presentar documentos falsos. Parece que hay casos de fraude de visa de Estados Unidos y dicen que el fraude en solicitudes de visa no solo afecta oportunidades migratorias, sino que también te puede llevar a procesos judiciales y a penas de prisión en República Dominicana.
La embajada de los Estados Unidos —el fraude de visa de Estados Unidos puede cerrar las puertas de por vida— está advirtiendo la embajada de los Estados Unidos en Santo Domingo. Han alertado sobre las graves consecuencias de cometer fraude en esas solicitudes de visa. Volvemos a lo de siempre, al primer punto. Mentir en una solicitud de cualquier tipo de documento en Estados Unidos es una felonía.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto. Y tiene que tener cuidado porque ahora, más que nunca, con el proceso de desnaturalización —que es otra de las metas del gobierno actual— pueden revisar o revisitar todas esas aplicaciones migratorias de las personas para determinar si esa persona cometió fraude o mintió.
Fíjese lo delicado de esto. Fraude, obviamente, implica un poquito más. Es una conducta todavía que la persona tiene que hacer un poco más. Misrepresentation o mentir es distinto, porque es simplemente algo que la persona haya dicho bajo juramento a un oficial de inmigración o que lo haya puesto en las aplicaciones, que también son bajo juramento.
Entonces, si una persona mintió o cometió algo que se llama misrepresentation, también puede tener esta consecuencia tan fuerte. Ahí es donde vengo yo, como abogada, y le digo a las personas: hoy más que nunca tengan cuidado. ¿A quién le dan su caso de inmigración? ¿A quién? Hay mucha gente que es la señora de la esquina o de allí que llena aplicaciones y que no sé qué. Pues fíjese usted que si esa persona llena mal esa aplicación, va a tener estas consecuencias graves y hasta un proceso de desnaturalización, por lo menos durante esta administración.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Doctora, como siempre, un placer. Martha Arias, amigos oyentes, ustedes necesitan una abogada de inmigración. Martha Arias ahí está, lista para tomar sus consultas. Mis queridos amigos oyentes, si hay algo delicado es precisamente un proceso migratorio en los Estados Unidos, no solamente por los costos económicos —que sería lo de menos— sino lo que se te puede retrasar un proceso, una petición en los Estados Unidos, si haces algo mal. Y digamos, si es de buena fe, aun siendo de buena fe, ¿o no, doctora?, lo que se demora un trámite mal hecho en volver a echar ese trámite para atrás y comenzar nuevamente, deshacerlo… y saben que el tiempo pasa inexorablemente. Eso sí que no se recupera. Así que…
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Si me permiten un segundo, esta nota es importante: la administración actual ha ordenado a todos los oficiales de inmigración que, cuando se niegue una residencia, esa persona sea automáticamente enviada a un proceso de deportación a la corte. O sea que un proceso mal hecho ya no es como antes, que uno simplemente lo presenta otra vez. Ahora te vas para la corte directamente.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Imagínese usted. Bueno, demasiado riesgo. Martha Arias, gracias por acompañarnos en el día de hoy, doctora. Un placer, y un placer verla en streaming.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias, gracias. Un placer verla a usted y a todo el estudio. Me encantan todas las banderas.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Tiene que venir un día, que tenemos la de Colombia. Mira, ahí está.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, yo veo la de Colombia allí. Sí, exacto.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Bueno, un gran abrazo, doctora.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias. Feliz día a todos.
ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT
LOURDES UBIETA:
Well, two topics that I wanted to discuss with you, friends. Today the number of self-deported people has gone up to two million since President Trump’s administration, serving as number 47. Well… two million people have self-deported from the country. Of those millions who entered, mostly during President Biden’s administration, in addition to those two million who have self-deported, who have decided to leave, there is also a significant number of people who have been deported.
And within all of this immigration process, deportations of immigrants to third countries have begun. And many have already begun arriving in one of our countries, Costa Rica, right? A first group of immigrants deported from the United States to third countries arrived in Costa Rica. There were about 25 of them, citizens of Albania, Cameroon, China, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenya, Morocco. All those people had entered here, dear listeners, through the southern border. We knew who they were: Cameroon, Kenya, Morocco… well, deported, and they arrived in Costa Rica.
I want to welcome immigration attorney Martha Arias, who is with us at this hour. Attorney, it has been a long time since we talked. Welcome to your home.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, yes, Lourdes. Days without talking. A pleasure to speak with you and with all that audience. And even better, a pleasure to see you, because now we have…
LOURDES UBIETA:
There we have our immigration attorney on screen, dear listeners. It is no longer only hearing her, but now we see her. A pleasure, attorney.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, the same. Now we have put a face to the voice, that is it.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Welcome, as always, to your home. You know that we appreciate you very much here at Radio Libre and we thank you for having accompanied us for so long through all these immigration crises that we have had in recent times. And well, I wanted, first of all, to know your opinion, right?, because the figures that have reached us are two million — the number is not round, but almost — self-deported people, that is, people who have decided to leave the country. And then I understand that 900,000, correct me, attorney, if I am wrong, is the number of people who have indeed been deported effectively from the United States.
A process that for some is slow, for others, in the middle of so many people who have to be processed, well… I do not know how you see it, whether it seems to you that we are going fast, whether it seems to you that it is going slowly, how you see this process.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I see that those figures appear to be real and a very close estimate. I suddenly think that the deported people may even be more, if we add those who are deported directly from the border, plus those that the judges are deporting. So I estimate that that figure is quite close, Lourdes. And what I also believe is that those quantities will increase even more soon.
The reason is that they are hiring more judges for these cases, which are the ones they call temporary judges. Last week, for example, I received a communication from the department of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, or as we call it, EOIR, by its initials, which said that 17 temporary judges and 19 new judges were sworn in. So if you add them up, there are more than 30 judges sworn in in one week who are obviously going to exercise functions as immigration judges to help in these mass deportation processes that the president announced and is carrying out.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Yes. In the year 2025, the figure being handled for deported people was 600,000. Between January 20 and December 31 of 2025. Fiscal year 2026, which is under way, which counts only October 2025 to February 2026, immigration judges have issued 262,021 deportation orders and voluntary departures.
There are also ICE arrests during the first year of the Trump administration, arrests carried out for having… do you remember?, or having applied voluntary departures. In short, there is a topic that is also the nationality of the people. Basically we are speaking of nationals of Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, but also of other African countries, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
In this process that is in full, let us say, in full execution, and we see the use of third countries, attorney, in this case Costa Rica, when a person is deported to a third country, what is the objective of that? Why can that person not be deported to…? Because here there are nationals of Guatemala and Honduras. Instead of being deported to their own countries, why are they deported to a third country like Costa Rica?
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, it may be that these people were approved for withholding of removal. Most of those are the cases. Withholding of removal is a deportation that is not carried out, it is held back, because the person may receive future persecution in his or her country.
So that figure of withholding of removal, which is very similar to asylum… The difference is that in asylum the person had past persecution and is going to have future persecution. In withholding, the person is going to have future persecution.
When they give withholding to the person, the person can live and work in the United States, but the statute does authorize that that person can be sent to a third country that is not the person’s country from which he or she asked for withholding, where his or her life is in danger, and this if that third country receives the person.
So, historically, withholding… this is the first time, at least in my 23 years that I have been practicing as an immigration attorney, that I see the government of the United States seek that third country, make the arrangement with that third country, and send the people there. Because although this has indeed always been in the statute, Lourdes, and let me clarify it, because sometimes people think that this is the first time that this has happened. Yes, it is the first time that it happens, that people are sent and that the government makes the arrangement. But it is not that this is not in the statute and that it was created from one day to the next. This has always existed in the statute, especially for people with withholding.
Now, the problem here, which is where much of the complaint comes from, is that many of those people who are also being sent there do not have withholding either. They are people who came here to request asylum and their country will not receive them back. So that is another situation for which they are sending these people. So it is like a combination of those people who have withholding and those whose petition in the United States has been denied and whose country will not receive them back.
I do not know why it is seen that the countries they are sending to Costa Rica, for example, now these latest ones, are from Albania, Cameroon, China, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenya, Morocco. I, like you, ask myself why. Why Honduras here? Of course, a withholding case.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Of course, a withholding case. Exactly. Well, what is interesting is that Costa Rica is also granting immigration status to some of them because in 2025 they received 200 deportees from the United States and 85 were given… pardon me, of 285, they were repatriated to their countries of origin, attorney. That is to say, what I cannot understand is why they do not repatriate them directly from the United States to their countries. I imagine it will be because of what you explain and not pass through a third country. In the end, many, in the case of Costa Rica, stay in Costa Rica and are given an immigration status.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. It is what Costa Rica… What Costa Rica, I understand, did with the United States is first to treat them humanely and give them housing for a week, review their asylum cases to see if they qualify, and if not, send them to other countries, but not to countries where they are going to receive persecution.
I cannot imagine… it is that in the end those who were repatriated to their own country may be that they finally made some arrangement with their country, or the person said, “Well, I am going to my country, I prefer to go to my country than stay here.” Who knows how the situation was. The point is that they are indeed reviewing asylum petitions there, in Costa Rica, for those who apply.
LOURDES UBIETA:
We are speaking with immigration attorney Martha Arias, dear listeners, at this hour with us live. Attorney, in Florida changes are going to be implemented in driver’s licenses. Dear listeners, pay attention to this.
As of January 1, 2027, implementation of law HB 991 begins. We have discussed it in other programs. What this law establishes is that all licenses and identifications issued in the state of Florida will explicitly indicate whether the person carrying that identification is a United States citizen or whether he or she has another legal status. Basically they are going to have little letters that say “citizen” or “non-citizen.” Attorney, what do you think of this?
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
It seems to me… let us see, here I say: obviously for the immigrant who does not have legal status it is going to be problematic, but it is not something that is going to cause so much upheaval, I think, because today many people who do not have legal status still cannot obtain the license. Those who obtain the license are residents or citizens or have a legal status, such as some tourist visa, I mean, investor visa, student visa, any visa that gives that status. So, suddenly, it is not the most shocking thing because we have already seen that Florida has been very strict in granting licenses to people without status.
What does seem shocking to me is the person who took the risk or was so… well, I do not know what word to use that is not a word of craziness, but a person who took the risk, a person who has the madness to get a driver’s license saying he or she is an American citizen. There they are really going to catch that person with solid proof for a possible deportation.
And let me explain it, Lourdes. I have had cases where the person used a birth certificate of a person from Puerto Rico, for example, saying that he or she is an American citizen, and they get the license. What happens is that sometimes it is difficult for the government to prove to the person that he or she did that, because although that certificate appears in that file, in that record of the person with Florida, with the Department of Motor Vehicles, there were ways there, especially before, of achieving a defense.
Once you have a driver’s license with a photo that says that you are an American citizen, if that person committed fraud, then it is going to be super easy for the government to prove that fraud to that person. So here is where I go with this: it should give a lot of fear to those who like to do those crazy things, because here it is indeed going to be strong proof. One.
Two, another thing. What I think: the people who have, especially the young people, Lourdes, the young people, for God’s sake, or that the parents who are listening to us tell the young people to be very careful about voting in a federal, state, or local election without even asking whether they are citizens or not.
Even though it may seem illogical, it happens many times and I have seen it thousands of times. Because look: a young person arrives in the United States very young, at two years old, three years old, who knows. The father and mother are American citizens. The young person never became a citizen, but he has in his mind that this is his country, he speaks perfect English, he lives here and thinks he can vote. And he gets to school and they say, “Look, it is time to register,” I do not know what, and they register him, as used to happen before. Or who knows who calls him and registers him, and that young person votes. My God, what do you think? If that young person votes, then it remains recorded that he voted or said that he was an American citizen without being one. And that is deportation without the right to have a waiver, Lourdes. That one goes deported for life.
LOURDES UBIETA:
It ends in deportation without the right to a waiver.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
What do you think? So here is where I say: even more so today, young people must protect themselves and be careful, because they are going to have a license and they are not going to be able to say to the department, with complete ease, “It is that I am a citizen.” Obviously it always has to be proven, but they have to be even more careful.
So it is a measure that is going to impact many things in the immigration part, but also those who are friends of what is not good or not correct have to be even more careful, because now it is indeed more difficult.
Lourdes, I was reading a summary of that project, that bill, of that law that passed. Look, there is one thing that catches my attention among many, but this also has to do with immigrants, and it is that those who are going to be candidates and who have dual citizenship are going to have to express it also to the Department of Motor Vehicles. That sounds a little complicated to me. I do not know if they are going to prevent them from being… from being candidates. What is that? Why was that required? Because to me everything has a reason, right? Why that requirement?
I know that at the federal level there are certain offices that a person who was not born in the United States cannot exercise, like the presidency. Others yes. So why here are they going to ask them to publish before the Department of Motor Vehicles their dual citizenship?
Another thing, that is for candidates who are going to be candidates for public office. And it also speaks, it says — and look, this is interesting — starting on July 1 a five-year statute of limitations is created for people who have been accused or convicted of a felony in violation of the election code. This is also something interesting.
Why? Because it means that there is going to be a statute of limitations, which means like a deadline within which charges can be brought against a person who has violated the statute or the election code as a felony. So it seems to me that in these five years, starting July 1, 2026 — because that part of the bill begins now in July — people who may have committed some violation in the election statute are going to be able to receive felony charges.
And this is delicate because, returning to the point of those young people who did not know or who, I do not know, may receive those notifications of having committed a felony. What would the advice be? Speak with your attorney. And here they are going to need two attorneys: the criminal attorney and the immigration attorney, so that the two of them handle this in a way that possibly that person does not have greater consequences.
That is why this starts in July. So we not only have the driver’s license part, there are many other things that, especially in terms of elections and candidates, are also going to have very interesting effects, I would say — I do not have a more specific word than “interesting” — they are really going to be delicate or sensitive, that is the word, for many immigrants.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Here I have a listener who tells us that the United States Embassy in the Dominican Republic has emphasized telling the truth and not presenting false documents. It seems there are cases of United States visa fraud and they say that fraud in visa applications not only affects immigration opportunities, but can also lead you to judicial proceedings and prison sentences in the Dominican Republic.
The United States Embassy — United States visa fraud can close the doors for life — the United States Embassy in Santo Domingo is warning. They have alerted about the serious consequences of committing fraud in those visa applications. We return to the usual, to the first point. Lying on an application for any type of document in the United States is a felony.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. And you have to be careful because now, more than ever, with the denaturalization process — which is another of the goals of the current government — they can review or revisit all those immigration applications of people to determine whether that person committed fraud or lied.
Look how delicate this is. Fraud, obviously, implies a little more. It is a conduct that the person has to do a little more. Misrepresentation or lying is different, because it is simply something that the person may have said under oath to an immigration officer or may have placed in the applications, which are also under oath.
So if a person lied or committed something called misrepresentation, that person can also have this very strong consequence. That is where I come in, as an attorney, and tell people: today more than ever be careful. To whom do you give your immigration case? To whom? There are many people who are the lady on the corner or over there who fills out applications and I do not know what. Well, notice that if that person fills out that application badly, it is going to have these serious consequences and even a denaturalization process, at least during this administration.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Attorney, as always, a pleasure. Martha Arias, dear listeners, if you need an immigration attorney, Martha Arias is there, ready to take your consultations. My dear listeners, if there is something delicate, it is precisely an immigration process in the United States, not only because of the economic costs — which would be the least of it — but also because of how much a process or petition in the United States can be delayed if you do something wrong. And let us say, if it is in good faith, even being in good faith, right, attorney?, how long a poorly done filing takes to set that filing back and start again, undo it… and you know that time passes inexorably. That is what cannot be recovered. So…
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
If you allow me one second, this note is important: the current administration has ordered all immigration officers that when a residency is denied, that person is automatically sent to a deportation process in court. So a badly done process is no longer like before, when one simply filed it again. Now you go to court directly.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Just imagine. Well, too much risk. Martha Arias, thank you for joining us today, attorney. A pleasure, and a pleasure to see you on streaming.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you, thank you. A pleasure to see you and the whole studio. I love all the flags.
LOURDES UBIETA:
You have to come one day when we have the Colombian one. Look, there it is.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, I see the Colombian flag there. Yes, exactly.
LOURDES UBIETA:
Well, a big hug, attorney.
ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you. Happy day to everyone.
