"I can't sleep": the nearly $2 million fine received by a migrant in the U.S.
Key Takeaways
- It has been reported that a man who allegedly lived more than 20 years in the U.S. received a nearly $2 million civil penalty tied to a 2010 removal order.
- The notice reportedly came from ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement); the migrant alleges he was not effectively notified at the time because he was in state custody.
- The penalty is said to be based on provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) that permit monetary sanctions for failure to comply with removal orders; legal remedies may include motions to reopen if service was defective.
- This case highlights a rarely discussed risk for people with old final orders: civil financial liabilities can accumulate silently and create life‑crushing debts long after the underlying immigration case is closed.
Qué ocurrió
It has been reported that the man, identified as Cuban in press coverage, received a notice from ICE listing nearly $2 million in fines for failing to depart after a deportation order issued in 2010. The story, reported by La Opinión and Telemundo, quotes the migrant saying “No puedo dormir, no puedo comer” after learning the amount. Allegedly his name and identity were withheld by reporters to avoid exposing him to additional risk. These core facts come from media interviews and the legal notice the man said he received; they have not been independently adjudicated in court reports available to the public.
Base legal y vías de defensa
According to the report, the sanction traces to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which includes mechanisms for civil penalties and enforcement related to failure to comply with removal orders. ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is the agency that enforces removal orders; USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) adjudicates benefits and is distinct from ICE. If a respondent was not properly served with an order — for example, because they were in state custody — that factual claim, if proven, can be grounds to seek reopening of removal proceedings with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) or to pursue other relief. It has been reported that the man is pursuing an appeal and will argue ineffective service; proving that can be difficult but can change the case’s outcome.
Quiénes podrían verse afectados y qué significa ahora
This is not only about one person. Any immigrant with a longstanding final removal order — including people who left contact details out of date, who were detained by other authorities, or who never received notice — could face similar civil assessments if agencies choose to pursue financial penalties. For people trying to regularize status now, this case is a warning: a past final order can carry hidden liabilities beyond deportation itself. Practically, affected individuals should obtain counsel quickly, request copies of immigration and court records (A‑file), check for outstanding orders, and consider filing motions to reopen within applicable deadlines. Legal relief is case‑specific; there is no automatic wipeout of accumulated fines, and deadlines to contest enforcement actions can be short.
Source: Original Article