Quelle surprise.
Where's the part where he was convicted of burglary and assault, and put in prison here in the US?
The individual in the X post (Severiano Martinez-Basquez, a Mexican citizen arrested by Bellingham Border Patrol agents assisting ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations near Tacoma, WA, on March 13, 2026) has multiple arrests for burglary and assault and is described as “currently being processed for removal proceedings.”
Even if convictions later occur, they are not needed to initiate or complete removal. ICE frequently uses detainers to take custody from local jails and starts removal while state/local criminal cases are ongoing.
Removal (deportation) proceedings under Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 240 are a civil administrative process separate from any criminal prosecution. They can begin based solely on immigration violations, such as unlawful presence in the U.S. (e.g., entry without inspection or admission), without any criminal arrest or conviction.
Unlawful presence alone triggers removability: Most noncitizens placed in removal proceedings lack lawful immigration status (e.g., entered without inspection or overstayed a visa). This is a civil violation, and ICE can issue a Notice to Appear (NTA) to start proceedings immediately. No criminal record is required.
Criminal grounds are optional and separate: Certain criminal convictions (e.g., aggravated felonies, crimes involving moral turpitude, or controlled-substance offenses under INA § 237(a)(2)) can make someone deportable after a conviction. However, these are not prerequisites for starting proceedings. Proceedings can (and routinely do) begin on non-criminal grounds like unlawful presence, even while criminal charges are pending or unresolved.
ICE/ERO can detain the individual and issue an NTA right away. Proceedings occur in immigration court (Executive Office for Immigration Review), where the government must prove removability by clear and convincing evidence (for those previously admitted) or by a preponderance (for others). The person may seek relief (e.g., cancellation of removal if eligible), but the mere fact of pending or unproven criminal charges does not pause or block the immigration process.
This is standard under current law (INA §§ 1229, 1229a, 1231 and implementing regulations). The post accurately reflects routine ICE practice: removable noncitizens with criminal histories (even just arrests) are prioritized for removal without needing criminal convictions first.
Apparently you support sending him back to his native country without paying for his crimes.
The law is the law.
Are you insisting that he be freed?
Yes, or no?
Answer, Christiecrite!