Deported family of U.S. citizen girl recovering from rare brain tumor is determined to return
A girl recovering from a rare brain tumor celebrated her 11th birthday Sunday, hundreds of miles away from everything she's known — her friends at school, her community at church, her home.
She's one of four U.S. citizen children who were sent to Mexico from Texas three months ago when immigration authorities deported their undocumented parents.
Fearing for their safety after the mixed-immigration-status family was taken to an area in Mexico that's been known for kidnapping U.S. citizens, they haven't given up on being able to return to the U.S. — primarily to continue the girl's medical treatment.
On Friday morning, the family is traveling to Monterrey to meet with members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. They hope that sharing their immigration plight motivates legislators to advocate for their return under humanitarian parole, according to a family representative.
'Pressure from the public about the deportation of vulnerable United States citizen children really is effective, and members of Congress are answering that call,' Rochelle Garza, president of the Texas Civil Rights Project, the legal advocacy and litigation organization representing the family, told NBC News on Thursday.
Democratic Reps. Adriano Espaillat of New York and Sylvia Garcia and Joaquin Castro of Texas are set to meet with the family, according to a spokesperson from the Texas Civil Rights Project.
'It's important that the public continue paying attention to this but also continue engaging and encouraging members of Congress to take action,' Garza said.
The girl's mother first told NBC News about the family's ordeal in March. The case got the attention of several other congressional lawmakers, including Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Alex Padilla of California as well as Rep. Al Green, D-Texas.
Since then, five other similar cases, including a mother who was deported to Honduras last month with her two U.S. citizen children, one of which is a 4-year-old boy with Stage 4 cancer, have become public.
'It would not surprise me if this were much more systemic than what we are currently seeing,' Garza said.
The mother previously told NBC News that on Feb. 3 the family was driving from the Rio Grande Valley, Texas, area where they lived to Houston, where their daughter's specialist doctors are based, for an emergency medical checkup.
On the way there, they stopped at a stateside immigration checkpoint, one they have passed through multiple times. The parents were equipped with letters from their doctors and lawyers to show the officers at the checkpoint.
But immigration authorities arrested the parents after they were unable to show legal immigration documentation. According to their attorney, Daniel Woodward, other than lacking 'valid immigration status in the U.S.,' the parents have 'no criminal history.' He added the parents were in the process of obtaining T visas, a temporary immigration benefit for victims of human trafficking.
Five of their children, ages 15, 13, 11, 8 and 6 — four of whom are U.S. citizens — were with them when they were arrested. The parents and the children were taken to a detention facility, where they spent 24 hours before they were placed in a van and dropped on the Mexico side of a Texas bridge on Feb. 4.
NBC News is not publishing the family members' names for safety reasons.
Attorneys for the family filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in March requesting a probe into abuses they say the family faced in U.S. detention. In the filing, they also requested immigration authorities grant humanitarian parole to the undocumented parents, the girl and one of her siblings.
But that DHS office, which protected the civil rights of both immigrants and U.S. citizens, was dismantled shortly after the attorneys filed the complaint — forcing them to refile it with the Office of Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services. They have not yet received a response.
A DHS spokesperson previously told NBC News that reports of the family's situation are 'inaccurate' and declined to speak on the specifics of the case, citing privacy reasons. They said in a statement that when 'someone is given expedited removal orders and chooses to disregard them, they will face the consequences.'
In response to a similar but separate case involving the removal of U.S. citizen children in connection with their mother's deportation, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement Thursday: 'The narrative that DHS is deporting American children is false and irresponsible reporting,' adding that immigration authorities ask mothers if they wish to be removed with their children or if they want the children to be placed in the safe custody of someone the parent designates.
McLaughlin added that undocumented parents can 'take control of their departure' by using the CBP Home app, the Trump administration's self-deportation app.
Speaking from Mexico in March, the mother of the 11-year-old said in a video message in Spanish provided to NBC News that she and her husband, when they were detained, 'faced the worst decision, an impossible one, to be permanently separated from our children or to be deported together.'
When undocumented parents of U.S.-born children are picked up by immigration authorities, they face the risk of losing custody of their children. Without power-of-attorney documents or guardianships outlining who will take care of the children left behind, the children can go into the U.S. foster care system, making it harder for parents to regain custody of their children in the future.
Just after her birthday, the girl had her first medical checkup in Monterrey this week.
Denisse Molina, a humanitarian outreach coordinator at the Texas Civil Rights Project, said it took her 'two exhausting days, countless phone calls, and being bounced between hospital departments' to secure a medical appointment and schedule an MRI for the girl.
'No one—especially a child in need — should have to fight this hard just to access essential care,' Molina told NBC News in a statement Thursday.
While this temporary solution is bringing the family some relief, regular medical checkups are critical, according to the child's mother and the family's advocates.
The child was diagnosed with the brain tumor last year and underwent surgery to remove it, the mother said after learning of the diagnosis through translators. But Woodward said that since contacting the girl's doctors and obtaining her medical records in the family's pursuit to obtain humanitarian parole, she found out the cause of the tumor was an 'unnamed 'novel' condition.'
Few medical specialists can effectively monitor these kinds of cases; the girl's U.S. doctors are among those with the necessary expertise. The girl needs scans and checkups every three months, her doctors told the Texas Civil Rights Project.
The surgery that saved the girl's life last year left her with some lasting side effects. The swelling on her brain is still not fully gone, her mother said in March, causing difficulties with speech and mobility of the right side of her body.
Before the family was removed from the U.S., the girl was routinely checking in with doctors monitoring her recovery, attending rehabilitation therapy sessions and taking medication to prevent convulsions.
In Mexico, the family has been able to enroll four of their children in school while they get ready to apply for humanitarian parole later this month at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
According to the USCIS website, applicants may demonstrate urgency by establishing a reason to be in the U.S. that calls for immediate action, including critical medical treatment, or the need to visit, assist or support a relative who is ill.
'Our hope is that members of Congress will learn about this particular case and support our request for humanitarian parole for the family,' Garza said.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
20 minutes ago
- Axios
U.S. has "no interest" in putting troops on the ground in Iran, Vance says
Vice President Vance said Sunday that the United States doesn't plan to send ground troops into Iran and there is "no interest" in engaging in a "protracted conflict" with the nation. The big picture: Vance and other Trump administration officials appeared on Sunday shows to praise President Trump 's decision to carry out a series of airstrikes against three Iranian nuclear sites, while reassuring Americans that the mission — dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer — isn't the launching point for a wider conflict. Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Vance called the mission a "precise, a very surgical strike tailored to an American national interest" — preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon — and that he had "no fear" of a drawn-out conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the sentiment on CBS' "Face the Nation," saying that there are no plans from the U.S. to engage in further attacks on Iran unless they "mess around" and attack Americans or U.S. military sites. What they're saying: Rubio said Sunday that the U.S. carried out the attack after efforts to negotiate with Iran stalled, but that Trump administration officials are "prepared to talk to them tomorrow." Both men also dismissed the notion that the U.S. is at war with Iran, with Vance stating that the war is with Iran's nuclear program. "We destroyed the Iranian nuclear program. I think we set that program back substantially," Vance told NBC News' Kristen Welker. Zoom out: Vance and Rubio were unable to confirm the extent of the damage done to the nuclear sites, but Iran Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told CNN that the strike was a "betrayal of diplomacy." "No one knows what will happen next, but what is sure is that the responsibility of the consequences of this war must be borne by the United States and Israel," he said. Bagahei refused to say how Iran might respond to the U.S. strike, but said the nation is entitled to "exercise its right of self-defense."
CNN
21 minutes ago
- CNN
Dem. Senator Adam Schiff says 'we simply don't know' if US is safer after Iran strikes
Democratic Senator Adam Schiff speaks to Kasie Hunt about the congressional response to President Trump's order to strike Iran.
Los Angeles Times
26 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Democrats at odds over response to Trump decision to join Israel-Iran war
After nearly two years of stark divisions over the war in Gaza and support for Israel, Democrats remain at odds over policy toward Iran after the U.S. strikes early Sunday. Progressives demanded unified opposition before President Trump announced U.S. strikes against Tehran's nuclear program, but party leaders were treading more cautiously. U.S. leaders of all stripes have found common ground for two decades on the position that Iran could not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. The longtime U.S. foe has supported groups that have killed Americans across the Mideast and threatened to destroy Israel. But Trump's announcement Saturday that the U.S. had struck three nuclear sites could become the Democratic Party's latest schism, just as it was sharply dividing Trump's isolationist 'Make America Great Again' base from more hawkish conservatives. Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, noted that in January, Trump suggested the U.S. could 'measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.' 'Today, against his own words, the president sent bombers into Iran,' Martin said in a statement. 'Americans overwhelmingly do not want to go to war. Americans do not want to risk the safety of our troops abroad.' Sen. Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat, said the U.S. entering the war in Iran 'does not make America more secure.' 'This bombing was an act of war that risks retaliation by the Iranian regime,' Welch said in a statement. While progressives in the lead-up to the military action had staked out clear opposition to Trump's potential intervention, the party leadership played the safer ground of insisting on a role for Congress before any use of force. Martin's statement took a similar tack, saying, 'Americans do not want a president who bypasses our constitution and pulls us towards war without Congressional approval. Donald Trump needs to bring his case to Congress immediately.' Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine called Trump's actions 'horrible judgment' and said he'd 'push for all senators to vote on whether they are for this third idiotic Middle East war.' Many prominent Democrats with 2028 presidential aspirations had been silent on the Israel-Iran war, even before Trump's announcement — underscoring how politically tricky the issue can be for the party. 'They are sort of hedging their bets,' said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of State who served under President Obama and is now a strategist on foreign policy. 'The beasts of the Democratic Party's constituencies right now are so hostile to Israel's war in Gaza that it's really difficult to come out looking like one would corroborate an unauthorized war that supports Israel without blowback.' Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) had called Trump's consideration of an attack 'a defining moment for our party.' Khanna had introduced legislation with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) that called on the Republican president to 'terminate' the use of U.S. armed forces against Iran unless 'explicitly authorized' by a declaration of war from Congress. Khanna used Trump's campaign arguments of putting American interests first when the congressman spoke to Theo Von, a comedian who has been supportive of the president and is popular among Trump supporters, particularly young men. 'That's going to cost this country a lot of money that should be being spent here at home,' said Khanna, who is said to be among the many Democrats considering seeking the presidential nomination in 2028. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who twice sought the Democratic presidential nomination, had pointed to Trump's stated goal during his inaugural speech of being known as 'a peacemaker and a unifier.' 'Supporting Netanyahu's war against Iran would be a catastrophic mistake,' Sanders said, referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Sanders reintroduced legislation prohibiting the use of federal money for force against Iran, insisted that U.S. military intervention would be unwise and illegal and accused Israel of striking unprovoked. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York signed on to a similar bill from Sanders in 2020, but so far was holding off this time. Some believed the party should stake out a clear antiwar stance. 'The leaders of the Democratic Party need to step up and loudly oppose war with Iran and demand a vote in Congress,' said Tommy Vietor, a former Obama aide, on X. The staunch support from the Democratic administration of President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for Israel's war against Hamas loomed over the party's White House ticket in 2024, even with the criticism of Israel's handling of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. Trump exploited the divisions to make inroads with Arab American voters and Orthodox Jews on his way back to the White House. Today, the Israel-Iran war is the latest test for a party struggling to repair its coalition before next year's midterm elections and the quick-to-follow kickoff to the 2028 presidential race. The party will look to bridge the divide between an activist base that is skeptical of foreign interventions and already critical of U.S. support for Israel and more traditional Democrats and independents who make up a sizable, if not always vocal, voting bloc. In a statement after Israel's first strikes on Iran, Schumer said Israel has a right to defend itself and 'the United States' commitment to Israel's security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran's response.' Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) said that 'the U.S. must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment.' Other Democrats have condemned Israel's strikes and accused Netanyahu of sabotaging nuclear talks with Iran. They are reminding the public that Trump withdrew in 2018 from a multinational nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions negotiated during the Obama administration. 'Trump created the problem,' Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) posted on X. A Pearson Institute/Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from September 2024 found that about half of Democrats said the U.S. was being 'too supportive' of Israel and about 4 in 10 said its level of support was 'about right.' Democrats were more likely than independents and Republicans to say the Israeli government had 'a lot' of responsibility for the continuation of the war between Israel and Hamas. About 6 in 10 Democrats and half of Republicans said they felt Iran was an adversary with whom the U.S. was in conflict. Gomez Licon and Beaumont write for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Linley Sanders, Will Weissert and Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report
