Lawsuit Alleges ICE Deported Three U.S. Citizen Children Including 4-Year-Old

A federal lawsuit filed July 31, 2025, in the Middle District of Louisiana accuses ICE of deporting three U.S. citizen children during April check-ins, without due process, legal access, or parental consent.

Plaintiffs say officers detained the families at routine appointments, blocked contact with lawyers and relatives, and removed them to Honduras within one to two days.

What the lawsuit alleges

According to the complaint, ICE violated constitutional rights and its own rules meant to protect families. The filing claims:

• Three U.S. citizen children were removed with their parents:
  • a 2-year-old girl born in Baton Rouge
  • a 4-year-old
  • a 5-year-old boy with stage-four kidney cancer
• ICE detained families in hotel rooms in Louisiana and moved to deport them rapidly, without time to seek help.
• Parents and children were denied access to lawyers and blocked from calling family.
• One mother was pregnant and was removed without steps to ensure prenatal care would continue.
• The actions allegedly violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, the Administrative Procedure Act, and an ICE directive (in effect until July 1, 2025) that instructed agents to avoid unnecessary family separation.

The lawsuit seeks damages, declaratory relief confirming the rights at stake, and injunctive relief to return the families to the United States 🇺🇸.

Who is named

Defendants named in the complaint include:

• Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem
• ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons
• Several field officers who handled the April removals

What happened in April 2025

Families say they arrived for routine ICE check-ins in Louisiana. Instead of a brief appointment:

1. Officers allegedly kept them out of public view.
2. Families were transported to hotel rooms and held there.
3. Removal paperwork was prepared.
4. Within one to two days, the three U.S. citizen children were on planes to Honduras with their noncitizen parents.

Key details and harms alleged:

• The 5-year-old was undergoing treatment for stage-four kidney cancer. The abrupt removal allegedly disrupted his care and created immediate risk.
• The 2-year-old is a birthright citizen from Baton Rouge.
• The 4-year-old was also removed.
• Parents report the children suffered medical and psychological harm after arrival in Honduras.
• One mother, who was pregnant, describes severe anxiety and health problems following the removal.
• Plaintiffs say they had no chance to:
  • arrange medical records,
  • secure a treatment plan abroad,
  • or notify relatives about the situation.

ICE response and ongoing dispute

Earlier in 2025, in a separate matter, DHS and ICE said they did not deport a U.S. citizen child, arguing the mother chose to take her child when she was removed. Advocates counter that such statements ignore situations where parents are held in custody and cut off from counsel.

This new case directly challenges those government claims by alleging ICE directly removed U.S. citizen children and did so without consent or due process.

Policy backdrop and funding

The complaint comes amid broader enforcement growth in 2025:

• Congress approved $170 billion for immigration enforcement in 2025.
• Advocates cite a 265% jump in detention funding in materials related to the case.

Critics warn that a larger detention system can produce faster removals and more mistakes, especially in family cases.

Why this matters for U.S. citizen children

When a child born in the U.S. is removed, the stakes are immediate and severe:

• Medical care can be disrupted without records or a continuity plan.
• Schooling and language support can be interrupted overnight.
• Trauma and fear may follow sudden moves, particularly when parents are detained.
• Legal rights tied to U.S. citizenship may go untested if a child cannot reach a lawyer.

For the child with cancer, continuity of care can be life-saving. For the other young children, early years are critical for development. Plaintiffs say all three faced harm in Honduras that could have been reduced or avoided if ICE had followed its directives and the Constitution.

“For the 5-year-old with cancer, continuity of care is more than a comfort; it can be life-saving.”
Plaintiffs argue that failures to follow ICE directives and constitutional protections resulted in preventable harm.

What the lawsuit asks the court to do

The families seek:

• Damages for physical, psychological, and other harms.
• Declaratory relief confirming the rights at issue.
• Injunctive relief ordering their return to the U.S. and preventing similar removals.

The case is supported by the National Immigration Project and several law firms. Media contacts listed in case materials include [email protected].

ICE policies and official information

ICE publishes information about its work and public contact points on its official site. For agency policy updates and announcements, visit: https://www.ice.gov.

The complaint cites a 2022 ICE directive (in effect until July 1, 2025) on family separation. Plaintiffs allege ICE failed to follow those instructions when it blocked access to counsel during Louisiana check-ins.

Practical steps families and advocates consider

While the lawsuit proceeds, families who attend check-ins often prepare basic items in case a visit runs long or leads to unexpected detention. Recommended steps include:

• Carry proof of a child’s U.S. citizenship (for example, a U.S. birth certificate).
• Keep medical records and medication lists for any child with ongoing treatment.
• Memorize or write down lawyer and emergency contacts.
• Create a simple family safety plan (who picks up children from school if a parent is delayed).
• Ask your lawyer about the right to contact counsel during any encounter with an officer.

These measures do not replace legal advice but can help families stay organized if an ICE appointment turns unexpected.

What comes next

The case was active as of August 2025. The court will decide whether ICE violated:

• the Constitution,
• the Administrative Procedure Act,
• and its own directive aimed at preventing unnecessary family separation.

Possible outcomes:

• If the families prevail, the court could order their return and restrict similar removals.
• If the government prevails, the dispute over the April actions in Louisiana will continue in the public arena.

With increased funding and a larger detention footprint, more families may face rapid removals unless there is strong oversight and clear safeguards. VisaVerge.com reports that close court review of field practices—such as access to lawyers during check-ins—could set standards shaping how ICE handles mixed-status families.