DACA Recipient Deported - Page 4

Between the lines? You should actually read:

You must have some fetish for embarrassing yourself. Please, legitimately, seek some mental help. It is very serious.

"didn't have"

"doesn't have"

are DIFFERENT THINGS!

Glad I am a college graduate!

You know what they say. You can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride. In criminal justice system even if you're completely innocent you'll probably spend at least the night in jail, better hope you don't get arrested on Friday because you won't see a judge until Monday at the earliest. If charges are particularly bad you might sit in jail for over a year before jury lets you off.

Previously ICE not arresting and not initiating removal proceedings against active DACAs was more a matter of their own policy. Legally speaking nothing really stops them from trying even if the court wouldn't order removal. Dismissal without relief essentially doesn't exist. Laken Riley act also killed release on own recognizance (aka cashless bail) and instituted mandatory detention for any EWI, not recent arrivals, any. Got caught after EWI'ing in 1997? Tough shit.
So like what are you going to do? Renew and sit in jail until 2029 at the earliest? Can't do a Habeas Corpus to get released because the detention is authorized by law. Only way out is maybe an 8th amendment claim like what happened with Chelsea Manning or dudes refusing to provide passwords to encrypted drives (in case of which sitting for 2 years in jail with no conviction is preferable to getting 20 years in prison).

Sessions got fired for not covering up the Mueller report. That's why they brought in Bill Barr to be the new AG. Dude managed to bury the Iran-Contra affair.

That makes sense why he didn’t renew whilst he was in detention because they would have just kept him in detention aka torture jail for the whole time. I figured that was the case.

Also, they have these deals with all these private prison companies in government contracts so they want to fill them up. These are the same companies that donated money to the Republicans. It all very corrupt.
https://www.citizensforethics.org/re...ated-to-trump/

"mandatory detention for any EWI, not recent arrivals, any"

Gemini:

That statement is partially true but contains some significant legal nuances regarding which individuals are actually affected.

The Laken Riley Act (which was signed into law in January 2025) did not create a blanket "mandatory detention for any and all EWIs" (Entry Without Inspection) regardless of their conduct. Instead, it specifically targets those who have certain criminal contacts.

Here is a breakdown of what is true and what is a common misunderstanding:
1. The "Mandatory Detention" Provision

The Act amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to expand mandatory detention for individuals who are "inadmissible" (which includes EWIs and those without valid documents). However, this only triggers if the person is also:

Charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admits to committing acts of:

Burglary

Theft

Larceny

Shoplifting

Assault of a law enforcement officer

Crimes resulting in death or serious bodily injury

2. Did it "kill" Release on Own Recognizance (ROR)?

For the specific group above: Yes. If an individual falls into the categories mentioned (e.g., an undocumented person arrested for shoplifting), the law removes the discretion of an immigration judge to grant a bond or release them on their own recognizance. They must remain in custody for the duration of their immigration proceedings.

For others: No. The Act does not automatically end "cashless bail" or ROR for every person who entered without inspection if they have no such criminal charges or arrests. However, other executive orders or policies might affect those groups, but the Laken Riley Act itself is specific to the theft-related offenses mentioned.