Detentions of Green Card Interview Participants Spark Legal and Immigration Debate Across the United States

Hadisur Rahman, JadeTimes Staff

H. Rahman is a Jadetimes news reporter covering the USA

---

Image Source: Daniella Silva, NBC News

A controversial pattern has emerged in immigration enforcement as several dozen spouses of U.S. citizens were detained during routine green card interviews in cities including San Diego, New York, Cleveland, and Utah. The detentions, occurring at USCIS interview offices, have raised alarms among immigration attorneys and advocates who describe the practice as an unprecedented departure from decades of policy norms surrounding family-based immigration pathways.

Lawyers familiar with the cases say the detainees were typically eligible for lawful permanent residency through marriage to U.S. citizens, despite having overstayed visas. The detentions have prompted urgent questions about the administration’s interpretation of immigration law and the handling of immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, a category traditionally afforded a smoother path toward permanent residence. Critics warn that detaining individuals at such a late stage of the process not only disrupts families but also strains resources and undermines confidence in the system.

Several attorneys noted that spouses face a lengthy and complex process to obtain a green card, often enduring more than a year of waiting for the complete adjustment procedure. In the interim, any interruption or detention can complicate or jeopardize their status, even for those who have committed no crimes and have long-standing family ties in the United States. Observers emphasize that the policy shift could have far-reaching consequences for the immigrant community, potentially deterring eligible applicants from pursuing lawful status or encouraging other unintended consequences.

The government has defended the actions, arguing that detentions occur when individuals are identified as having outstanding warrants, removal orders, or other disqualifying factors under immigration law. Officials assert that the enforcement approach remains targeted and within the bounds of existing statutes, even as critics argue the new tactic effectively broadens what counts as a enforcement priority and increases the risk of inflicting harm on families seeking stability.

Responses from the legal community highlight a broader concern about consistency and predictability in immigration policy. Several attorneys described a landscape where practices can shift with political leadership, leaving applicants and their families uncertain about the trajectory of their petitions. As cases proceed through immigration court, the detained spouses and their families face additional hurdles, including potential removal proceedings and the complexities of navigating a backlog-ridden system.

Advocacy groups are calling for transparent guidelines that protect the rights of immediate relatives and ensure that lawful pathways to permanent residency are enforced with fairness and due process. With the policy landscape continuing to evolve, many families remain hopeful that legal remedies and policy reforms will restore stability to the process and reaffirm the United States’ commitment to the rule of law and humane treatment of sincere applicants pursuing lawful status.