English 
Português 
Español 
The corridors of United States immigration courts are no longer just waiting rooms before hearings. Since early 2025, agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have been waiting for immigrants outside courtrooms, identifying them by name, and detaining them the moment a judge closes the case at the government’s own request. The practice, documented in Miami, Las Vegas, New York, Phoenix, and Los Angeles, has turned routine hearings into real risk points for anyone who appears without an attorney or without a clear legal strategy.
The movement intensified throughout 2025 and remains active in 2026. For immigrants with ongoing cases, understanding the mechanism behind these arrests is no longer just a technical detail: it has become a matter of personal protection. This guide details what drives the detentions, who is a priority target, and what practical steps can reduce exposure at in-person hearings.
What Is Happening in the Courts
The pattern observed in Miami is repeating across the country. Attorneys from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) enter the courtroom and ask the immigration judge to seek dismissal of the ongoing removal proceedings. When the judge grants the request, the case is closed under Section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. From the immigrant’s perspective, it can look like a momentary victory. It is not.
Without an active case in Immigration Court, ICE regains administrative authority to apply expedited removal, as provided under Section 235(b)(1) of the INA. This procedure requires no judge, no public hearing, and can result in deportation within days. It is precisely in this gap between the dismissal and leaving the building that the arrests take place.
The DHS Memorandum of January 2025
The legal basis for the operation is a designation notice published by the DHS in January 2025, which drastically expanded the reach of expedited removal. Previously, the tool was limited to individuals detained within 100 miles of the border within two weeks of entry. The new rule extended its reach to the entire national territory and to anyone unable to prove continuous presence in the United States for two or more years.
In practice, this particularly affects those who entered through the southern border starting in 2023, received a Notice to Appear, and continued living in the country while awaiting a hearing. Cubans, Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, and Haitians who entered through the Biden administration’s humanitarian parole program, ended in 2025, also became preferred targets.
The Case of Form I-220A
Many of the Cubans detained in Miami had received Form I-220A at the border, an order of supervision that allows the person to remain free while their case proceeds, but does not constitute a formal admission into the United States.
This distinction is critical for those seeking to use the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, which allows Cubans with one year and one day of presence in the country to apply for a green card. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has established that holders of Form I-220A were not technically admitted or paroled, and therefore do not meet the eligibility requirement for adjustment of status. The result is a large population of Cubans who believed they were on the path to permanent residency but who technically remain without a legal entry pathway and have now become a priority target for corridor arrests.
Who Is in the Crosshairs
The most exposed profiles share three characteristics. The first is less than two years of presence, which enables the direct application of expedited removal nationwide. The second is the absence of an affirmative asylum application filed with USCIS via Form I-589, since an affirmative petition creates an additional layer of procedural protection. The third is an active court case that the DHS can move to dismiss, opening the administrative pathway.
Families with children, unaccompanied minors, and individuals with chronic health conditions are not excluded. Reports from Miami include a Cuban man taken into custody even after his wife informed agents that he depended on continuous medication for diabetes.
Mandatory Detention of Recent Arrivals
A recent Board of Immigration Appeals decision reinforced this landscape by permitting the mandatory detention of recent arrivals under Section 235 of the INA, with no right to a bond hearing. This means that even without a criminal record and without a flight risk, an immigrant may remain detained until the administrative procedure concludes. The combination of mandatory detention, geographic expansion of expedited removal, and corridor arrests constitutes, according to the American Immigration Lawyers Association, a structural reorganization of the removal system.
How to Reduce Exposure
Attorneys practicing at the Miami courthouse have been advising clients with ongoing cases to take concrete steps before each hearing.
- Request a videoconference hearing whenever the judge allows it, avoiding in-person appearance in rooms where ICE conducts surveillance.
- Appear with a credentialed attorney or at least with representation from a nonprofit organization recognized by the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
- Firmly refuse, with legal support, any DHS dismissal motion without first understanding the consequences, since closing the case can reopen the path to expedited removal.
- Always keep available proof of more than two years of physical presence in the U.S., such as utility bills, contracts, tax returns, and school records.
- File the affirmative asylum application via Form I-589 within the one-year deadline, even when the case is already in court, to preserve the right of subsequent review by USCIS.
What to Expect in the Coming Months
Pressure on the courts is unlikely to ease in the short term. The policy has been presented by the federal administration as a pillar of a large-scale removal strategy. For immigrants with open cases, the honest assessment is that the hearing is no longer a protected space. The defense starts before the scheduled date, with a strategic choice of the type of protection sought, proper formalization of petitions before USCIS, and documentary preparation to withstand a potential administrative referral.
The landscape also brings back to the forefront immigration pathways that depend less on the court calendar. Cancellation of removal, asylum withholding, U visa for crime victims, and family-petition-based adjustments remain available, but require technical planning before the next hearing. Those who wait until the scheduled date to decide their path risk having no options left when they walk out of the room.
Victoria Harper
Editor-in-Chief
Leading journalism and editorial content at Visto n’ Visa, Victoria helps make immigration topics clear, trustworthy, and easy to understand. Her focus is on delivering useful, human, and relevant content for people exploring new paths abroad.
