Biden's ICE Nightmare: Detainees Vanish, Borders Explode!

A wave of unsettling posts floods social media daily – claims of individuals “disappearing” after encounters with immigration enforcement, accusations of human trafficking, or stories of children allegedly snatched by ICE. These narratives, often emotionally charged, circulate rapidly, yet rarely include updates from families actively searching for their loved ones. The truth is far more complex than these viral claims suggest.

The assertion that individuals detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement are “missing” frequently stems from a misunderstanding of legal procedures, not actual disappearances. Often, “missing” simply means a detainee hasn’t yet contacted family. While initial communication can sometimes be delayed by a few days, particularly around weekends or holidays, no one is ever truly unaccounted for within the system.

Activists often amplify claims of missing individuals when ICE declines to release information. This isn’t a cover-up, but a matter of legal protocol. Personal details are only shared with an attorney or immediate family member. Requests from others are rightfully denied, yet are often framed as evidence of a hidden disappearance, despite the individual remaining in documented custody.

Many cases involve individuals with long-standing deportation orders that were simply not enforced for years due to shifting policy. If someone fails to appear at an immigration hearing, a judge issues a removal order. This order remains valid, a legal shadow, unless successfully reopened or stayed. The individual is then considered unlawfully present and subject to detention at any time.

A common tactic is to portray ICE arrests as unjust, claiming the individual was “doing things the right way” – attending interviews or filing applications. This implies compliance with the system, unfairly suggesting deportation is a cruel punishment for following the rules.

However, a prior deportation order doesn’t vanish with new filings. Asylum applications, green card requests, or marriage-based petitions don’t erase existing legal obligations. That order remains in effect until formally reopened or overturned. Attending an interview with an active removal order simply confirms the individual’s unlawful presence and justifies detention.

During a recent period, enforcement guidance limited interior arrests and removals, allowing many with final orders to remain in the U.S. for extended periods. These orders weren’t canceled, merely deprioritized. Enforcement shifted, but the underlying legality remained unchanged.

Now, those long-dormant orders are being actively enforced. ICE is resuming the execution of orders dating back years, even those issued in 2020 or earlier. Interviews, like those for green cards, are sometimes used as controlled settings to confirm identity and ensure compliance with scheduled appearances – and to execute existing orders.

Public narratives often focus on labels like “asylum seeker” or “green card applicant,” obscuring the crucial fact of the existing removal order. Critical details – prior criminal convictions, missed hearings, or years of unenforced removability – are frequently omitted, despite their legal significance.

Confusion over immigration record systems also fuels the “missing” narrative. ICE locator tools only show individuals currently in custody. Once deported or released, they disappear from the system. This doesn’t mean they’ve vanished; it simply reflects their change in status, documented through separate records.

Consider the case of Allan Dabrio Marrero, detained during a marriage-based green card interview. He was an asylum seeker who later married a U.S. citizen, but was unlawfully present in the country at the time of his arrest. The marriage itself was legally valid, but didn’t negate his immigration status.

Marrero had missed an immigration court hearing in 2022, resulting in an in-absentia deportation order. His husband and supporters claim he never received notice, but under U.S. law, that order remained valid regardless. Filing a green card application doesn’t erase a prior removal order, and simply being unaware of it isn’t a legal defense.

When Marrero appeared for his interview, the 2022 order was still active, allowing ICE to take him into custody. His attorney filed a motion to reopen the case, temporarily halting deportation while it was reviewed. DHS affirmed that Marrero received “full due process” – a term often misused by activists claiming deportees are denied fair treatment.

In reality, “due process” has already been provided through the immigration court system, often resulting in a judge-issued removal order. Individuals arrested at courthouses are typically those who have exhausted all appeals. The system, while complex, operates within the bounds of the law, and claims of disappearance often mask a misunderstanding of that process.