Jessica Bowman Yanez is a Board Certified Specialist in Immigration Law in North Carolina. She has worked on cases involving removal defense, U visas, VAWA, naturalization, and family-based petitions. Jessica loves staying in touch with her clients and is committed to providing outstanding service. Yaez Immigration Law is dedicated to helping refugees and providing superior service. They can be reached at 919.487.1466 or via email at yanez immigration law.
ICE agents screamed “don’t move”
After being arrested by ICE agents, Florencio Millan, an undocumented immigrant, was unable to leave the car. His girlfriend started recording the incident. When the ICE agents screamed, “don’t move!” she hid under her bed and began recording. She is now sharing the video on Facebook. She said the panic is worse than losing a loved one.
Angelica’s children were clinging to her legs as ICE agents screamed “Don’t move!” and grabbed her by the arm. She was taken to a processing center, where ICE agents fingerprinted all Latinos from O’Neill. Angelica looked around the tent, hoping to recognize anyone she knew. She saw Walter, wearing dirty clothes from his cattle ranch, and wearing chains around his waist. Walter and Angelica’s seven-year-old daughter would be separated from their parents.
As the immigrant community has grown savvy, so has the way ICE agents operate. The community uses social media to disseminate information about ICE raids. Now, they must conduct more surveillance to protect immigrants. ICE agents claim they do not just randomly search for immigrants, but go after specific targets, as a result. If you’re a single mother in a low-income neighborhood, you might not be a target.
ICE agents broke down a door
During a raid on the apartment of an immigrant couple, ICE agents broke down a door and arrested a woman and her husband under the Yanez immigration law. The women and their unborn baby were asleep in the apartment when the agents burst into their room. They pointed guns at them and demanded that they “don’t move.” Luckily, the female immigration agent came to their assistance. They were not handcuffed and were not led outside the dwelling. Yanez and her partner were arrested and immigration agents confiscated Yanez’s tax returns and pay stubs. Their photo albums were also confiscated.
In the case of Yanez, ICE agents broke down the bedroom door and seized his belongings. He was not alone; three other immigrants were detained with him. The immigration law has a long history of protecting immigrants and migrants from unwarranted abuse. The case of Maria Yanez-Marquez, a civil alien from El Salvador, is one of many similar cases. However, the Fourth Circuit held that the BIA’s decision was justified and Yanez’s actions were not unreasonable.
Yanez argued that the illegal detention of an immigrant under the Yanez immigration law violated his Fifth Amendment due process rights. In the end, the Immigration Judge rejected Yanez’s argument and concluded that the statements were not made voluntarily. This case is yet another case where an immigration judge rejected a motion to suppress and dismiss. If you are an immigrant, you should be aware of the risks and benefits of immigration law.
While the entry was illegal, the timing was reasonable. Yanez was not arrested until five a.m., which would have been acceptable under the terms of the search warrant. The invasion of privacy was not egregious, and the warrant was valid. Yanez also claimed that ICE agents violated five federal regulations, including the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Yanez also argued that the warrant had no particularity because no specific items were listed. In addition, the agents should have known that the Premises was a multifamily dwelling.
ICE agents screamed “don’t move” while interrogating Yanez
As the pregnant woman tried to defend herself during an ICE raid on her home, two ICE agents burst in, pointed their guns and demanded that she “don’t move.” The immigration officer, a female, reassured her that she was not handcuffed or led out of her residence. During the raid, ICE agents also arrested Yanez’s partner, took his belongings, confiscated his pay stubs, and seized his tax returns, among other things.
At a hearing before the Immigration Judge, Yanez claimed that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated by the ICE agents’ use of excessive force while interrogating him. The Immigration Judge disagreed, holding that the ICE agents did not abuse Yanez’s Fourth Amendment rights. The immigration judge also rejected Yanez’s substantive claims that the search was unlawful and that she was unable to make an informed decision.
The IJ held that ICE agents violated Yanez’s Fourth Amendment rights, as they improperly executed a search warrant at her home outside of business hours, and that the ICE agents did not follow proper procedure by implementing the search warrant at 5:00 a.m., when it should have been between six and ten p.m. Further, the warrant lacked particularity, describing no item to be seized, and did not specify that the property was a multi-family dwelling.
The ICE raid on Yanez’s home was not the first investigation of an illegal immigration problem. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was investigating Annapolis Paint Services, and the owners of 402 Harbor Drive in Annapolis, Maryland. The operation involved two undocumented aliens, Jose Umana Ruiz and Yanez, an El Salvadorian. Yanez was her long-term partner and five months pregnant when the raid occurred.
ICE agents used excessive force
In Yanez’s lawsuit, she argued that ICE agents used unreasonable force and violated her Fourth Amendment rights by searching her home and coercing her into making incriminating statements. She cited five different federal regulations as reasons for the excessive force. One of the regulations, 8 C.F.R. SS 287.8(b)(2), states that immigration officers may detain someone if they have reasonable suspicion of illegal activity. But the IJ ruled that the agents did not exceed reasonable force under Yanez’s claim.
ICE agents broke into the apartment Yanez and her partner were sleeping in and pointed guns at them. They yelled at the pair and told them to “stay put,” but they did not listen. A female agent later came to the home and reassured the pregnant woman, but Yanez did not comply with the orders. During this time, Yanez’s partner was arrested and her photo albums and pay stubs were seized.
The IJ rejected Yanez’s motion to suppress the evidence and denied the deportation. The IJ noted that the government had not demonstrated a prima facie case, despite Yanez’s claim that the agents used excessive force and coercion to remove her from the United States. The IJ held that Yanez’s statements were not involuntarily made and that the evidence seized was properly preserved.
Although the police used reasonable force, the court cannot conclude that the agents used excessive force because the premises were not a multi-unit dwelling. While the officers claimed to have reasonable suspicion, Yanez’s partner did not tell them that she was pregnant, so she cannot have been arrested without any evidence. The court found that the officers acted reasonably and without excessive force, despite the evidence. In fact, the officers acted in good faith.
ICE agents did not threaten, coerce, or physically abuse Yanez
The Fourth Circuit’s recent decision on a petition filed by asylum seeker Maria Yanez does not address her rights to privacy. Rather, the decision addresses the ICE agents’ use of a WRAP, a medical device that can be registered with the FDA. The WRAP binds the legs together at a 45-degree angle, inflicting immense physical and psychological harm. Because of her underlying medical condition, the damage was multiplied. Furthermore, ICE agents violated numerous laws, including the Convention Against Torture, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the Rehabilitation Act. In addition, the use of The WRAP violated ICE standards for the use of restraints.
ICE agents entered the house in the middle of the night, pointing guns at the couple sleeping inside. They ordered the couple to remain in the dwelling, despite Yanez’s pregnancies. However, the agents did not handcuff her or physically abuse her. However, the agents arrested her partner and seized her personal items, including tax returns, photo albums, and pay stubs.
Although the ICE agents did not use physical violence, they did not provide a warrant. They also did not inform Yanez of her right to an attorney or say she could refuse to answer questions. The agency’s claims are based on a case study in which immigration law is an important factor. As a result, the court ruling is favorable for immigration law cases.
As the Trump administration continues to target immigrants in the country’s immigration system, the case against ICE agents is a clear reminder that these agents cannot be trusted. They must be regulated to ensure they do not engage in any sexual activity between detained immigrants and immigration officials. Despite their ambiguous stance, Yanez’s case is highly compelling. It underscores the need for more robust oversight and accountability measures for immigration officials.