Yes, ICE Mistakenly Deported Another Illegal Alien From El Salvador Against A Court's Order -- It's Joe Biden's Fault

The country may gain an appreciation for how convoluted the process of deportation has become with the massive number of illegals the Biden Administration allowed to enter the country.

Next up on the “Illegal Alien Hit Parade” docket is the matter of Jordin Melgar-Salmeron (JMS), an illegal alien from El Salvador who was returned to his home country pursuant to an Order of Removal on May 7, 2025. His flight departed for El Salvador from Louisiana at 10:20 am that morning. At 9:52 am — 28 minutes earlier — the Second Circuit Court of Appeals entered an Order granting JMS’s Motion to Stay his removal pending the disposition on a Petition for Review he had filed in that court. So a controversy has now developed where the Appeals Court has asked for an explanation as to how this happened, the attorney for JMS is asking that DHS be held in contempt, and that JMS be brought back to the United States so his appeal can be completed.

A bit of background:

In May 2021 JMS pled guilty in federal court in the Western District of Virginia to illegal possession of a sawed-off shotgun. JMS illegally entered the U.S. at age 15. His possession of the illegal shotgun happened when he was arrested for drunk driving. His fingerprints showed that he had been deported by ICE in 2012, meaning he had an Order of Removal in place. He had remained in custody since the date of his arrest — January 24, 2021. After his 24 month criminal sentence was served, he remained in custody pending removal based on the 2012 deportation. Absent a court order staying his removal, the Trump Administration could send him out of the country at the first available opportunity.

While in detention pending removal back to El Salvador, JMS pursued relief in the form of “Withholding of Removal” back to El Salvador, and under the provisions of the “Convention Against Torture” (CAT). Relief under either law would have allowed JMS to avoid removal to El Salvador, but neither would have given him permission to remain in the U.S.

An Immigration Judge rejected both claims, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the Judge. JMS had one last avenue he could pursue — a “Petition for Review” of the BIA decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. That Court can only review legal issues in JMS’s case, not any of the factual determinations made by the immigration courts.

Without any stay in place, and with his Petition pending, in late April ICE scheduled JMS for removal back to El Salvador on May 7, 2025. JMS was being held by ICE at its facility in Buffalo, New York, but with a scheduled removal date he was transferred to a staging facility in Louisiana where he would be processed for removal and put on a flight to El Salvador.

Around the same time that ICE scheduled JMS for removal, an electronic note was entered in his case file that stated his removal date was scheduled for May 9 — not May 7. This incorrect information was communicated to the DOJ attorney handling the case in the Second Circuit. As part of an effort to have his pending Petition for Review expedited, the Government noted for the Court his removal date, but advised the Court based on the mistaken entry that it was May 9, and not the May 7. JMS’s scheduled removal was at all times May 7 — it was never changed. In a notice to the Court, the DOJ attorney advised that it would not forbear JMS’s removal beyond May 8 — reflecting the incorrect belief by the attorney that the removal was scheduled for May 9.

The Court granted JMS’s motion to stay his removal on the morning of May 7, but the process of placing JMS on the outbound flight for El Salvador was already underway and he departed on that flight just 28 minutes after the Court entered its Order. No one at the facility in Louisiana was made aware of the Order prior to the plane leaving.

The attorney for JMS filed a motion for the Government to be cited for contempt. The Court sent DOJ a letter with a series of pointed questions that it wanted answered about why JMS was removed on May 7 less than 30 minutes after its Order even though the Government had notified the Court that his scheduled removal was May 9, and the Government agreed to forego his removal until May 8.

The DOJ has now provided to the Court a lengthy explanation of the sequence of events between April 25 and May 7 that reflects what happened in the case of JMS. But more importantly, it also reveals why the Biden Administration’s decision to allow millions of unvetted illegal aliens to come into the country has created a bureaucratic morass in the form of the removal process that is 100% certain — because of the sheer numbers — to produce many more cases like JMS in the future.

1. The Court wanted to know why the DOJ attorney sent the Stay Order to the ICE officials at the facility in Buffalo given that JMS had been moved to Louisiana two weeks earlier, and departed from that facility on the morning of May 7. The DOJ informed the Court that under ICE’s process, the Buffalo facility retained “administrative control” over JMS’s case for purposes of monitoring the status of his pending court case. The Louisiana facility’s involvement was only with respect to executing the Removal on the date set by the Buffalo office.

2. The Court wanted to know why JMS’s departure date was moved up from May 9 to May 7, and how it came to be that he was removed only 28 minutes after the Court entered its Order staying his removal. The DOJ informed the Court that, after reviewing the history of JMS’s case, it determined that his removal date was originally set for May 7 and was never changed. The reference to May 9 came from one electronic note made in the case file by the Case Officer that was a mistake. Unfortunately, that mistake was passed to the DOJ Attorney when the effort was made to expedite the pending appeal on his case. The DOJ Attorney unwittingly provided that same inaccurate information to the Court. JMS was removed 28 minutes after the Order because no ICE personnel in New Orleans were aware of the Order at the time JMS was put on the flight.

3. On the morning of May 7, after receiving the Court’s Order staying JMS’s removal, the DOJ attorney sent notice and a copy of the Order to the Buffalo ICE Office which had administrative control of JMS’s case file, and was the Office responsible for updating all information about his pending court case. The DOJ Attorney — and many other DOJ Attorneys handling nearly identical cases — was the process of trying to accelerate the removal of an untold number of illegal aliens with Removal Orders after the Biden Administration had done little in that regard. So, as noted in the Response to the Court, the massive volume of email traffic involving illegal aliens like JMS, which began with the takeover of the process by the Trump Administration, made timely opening of emails and other notifications an ongoing problem.

4. ICE Louisiana typically extracted a flight manifest for scheduled removals 24 hours prior to the flight’s departure. On May 6 the facility did that for JMS’s flight the next morning. On the morning of May 7, using that flight manifest, ICE Louisiana personnel begin assembling the individuals at the facility who were on the manifest one hour prior to time of departure. When the ICE staff cross-referenced the names on the flight manifest with the names of those who were gathered in the facility, JMS was not present with the group. He was then stricken from the manifest and marked as a “No Show” in the electronic database. The remainder of the individuals gathered for removal were then place aboard the plane. In this time frame the Buffalo ICE Officer assigned to JMS’s case became aware a flight was departing for El Salvador and checked the flight manifest to confirm that JMS was not on the flight as the Officer was also under the mistaken belief that his removal was set for May 9 and that JMS had filed a Motion to Stay Removal in the Second Circuit that had not yet been ruled upon. The flight manifest showed that JMS was a “No Show” and was not on the flight.

5. Prior to the flight’s departure JMS was found within the ICE facility. He was quickly sent to the departure location and placed on the flight as this was the flight the ICE Louisiana staff believed he was scheduled to be removed on in late April. But the flight manifest listing him as a “No Show” was not updated after he was added to the flight. When the ICE Buffalo Case Officer received the Second Circuit Order staying JMS’s removal, his information was still that JMS had not been on the flight manifest — he was a “No Show.” Because of that, he did not make any effort to contact the Louisiana facility or transmit the Court’s Order staying JMS’s removal in order to prevent his removal.

6. The Court Order was received by the Buffalo office was received at 10:08 am, prior to the flight’s departure from Louisiana. But because the flight manifest in the electronic data base still listed JMS as a “No Show” on the flight that morning, the Order was not immediately sent to Louisiana. At 10:30 am, ten minutes after the flight departed, the Buffalo Office received the flight manifest for the flight “as departed.” That manifest continued to show JMS as a “No Show” and not onboard the plane.

So, yes, the Trump Administration did remove an illegal alien from El Salvador back to El Salvador 28 minutes after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York issued an Order directing that he not be removed until his pending case was resolved. But the characterization seen in some media reports that this reflects “haphazard” conduct is inaccurate because it is devoid of context.

JMS’s removal wasn’t the result of “haphazard” conduct or any other kind of neglect. It was the result of one incorrect electronic entry in the case file — that he was scheduled for removal on May 9 when, in fact, he was always scheduled for removal on May 7. No one noted the erroneous entry when it was made, and no one recognized the issue created by the erroneous entry when it was passed on to DOJ and the Court.

This process is going to play itself out for MILLIONS of illegal aliens over the coming years thanks to Joe Biden. The expectation that the bureaucratic nightmare that this process entails — with much taking place parallel in time with ongoing court proceedings — can be managed on an error-free basis is simply stupid and moronic.

Mistakes are going to be made — a lot of them — because it only takes a mistaken keystroke or two, or an not-timely-opened email notification, or the failure to immediately update electronic database information the moment facts change, for the process to spit out a JMS-like result.

This demand for process perfection — and criticism that results from a failure by people who want no deportations to happen — all comes on behalf of individuals who came into the country and lived here illegally. Some, like JMS, commit more crimes after they committed their first crime in the manner of their arrival.

In the context of criminal trials, the Supreme Court — courts at all levels as a matter of fact — has held that the “due process” clause of the Fifth Amendment is not the promise of a “perfect” and error-free trial. It only requires a “fair” trial — one that will sometimes include erroneous aspects. At the end of the process the relevant question is whether it was “fair.”

We need to make room for that attitude when it comes to the “due process” required for removing the millions of illegal aliens that Joe Biden and the Democrats have welcomed into the country.

It is worth noting that the vote by the Second Circuit panel on JMS’s motion for a stay was 2-1. So one of the three Circuit judges was of the view that there was so little of consequence left in JMS’s case that there wasn’t a justification to prevent his removal while the final steps played themselves out.