10
Loading video...
By Billal Rahman
Immigration Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A federal judge has denied a request to block the potential "cruel" deportation of two Laotian immigrant grandparents who are facing removal over decades-old drug convictions, according to court filings.
U.S. District Judge Tana Lin of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington ruled on April 17 that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief requested, which sought to prevent immigration authorities from detaining and deporting the pair without extended advance notice and a hearing.
The petitioners, Oucho Saelee and Lai Chiem Saelee, both born in 1961, are described in court filings as "non-violent, medically impaired grandparents" who entered the United States in 1980 and later became lawful permanent residents. They have lived in the U.S. for more than four decades and have multiple U.S. citizen children and grandchildren.
Read More on News
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) told Newsweek, “Oucho Saelee and his wife are two criminal illegal aliens. This criminal couple was previously convicted of selling and smuggling opium. The wife was also arrested for drug trafficking in 2018, violating a condition of her supervised release. Both have been issued a final order of removal by an immigration judge. Despite their criminal history and removal order, a radical judge appointed by Joe Biden RELEASED them back into American communities. The Trump administration will not ignore the rule of law and continues to execute their removal."
“Under President Trump and [Homelans Security] Secretary [Markwayne] Mullin, criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the U.S.”
...
The pair were convicted in 1993 of non-violent opium-related offenses in Washington state, and each served a 10-year prison sentence, according to court documents. Following their convictions, immigration judges issued final orders of removal against both individuals in the 1990s and early 2000s.
According to court documents, a member of their community persuaded them to take part in a drug importation scheme.
President Donald's Trump administration is pursuing a hard-line mass deportation plan, coordinating resources across Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and other federal agencies to arrest and remove migrants without legal status. There has been multiple individuals with prior arrests or criminal convictions, including non-violent immigrants, who have been among those targeted in enforcement operations under Trump.
"To remove petitioners from their U.S. citizen children, grandchildren, and loved ones and return them to the country of their birth, a country that denies them citizenship, is an action that many would call cruel and heartless," the judge wrote in court documents.
The pair remained under supervision in the United States because Laos had not been accepting deported individuals for many years, meaning they could not be removed.
Until recently, Laos accepted very few people for repatriation from the United States, largely limiting or delaying cooperation on deportations. However, it has begun to accept a small number of returnees again after Trump imposed a travel ban.
During that time, they were required to regularly report to immigration authorities and comply with supervision conditions, which the court record indicates they did without further criminal incidents.
In their petition, the couple asked the court to require immigration authorities to provide six months to one year of advance notice before any detention and to hold a pre-detention hearing. They argued that such notice was necessary to allow time to pursue additional legal challenges, including efforts to reopen their immigration proceedings and address their decades-old convictions.
Government attorneys opposed the request, arguing that federal law bars courts from interfering in the executive branch’s discretion over the execution of removal orders, including the timing of enforcement actions.
In her ruling, Lin wrote that the court could not intervene in decisions related to the execution of deportation orders. She cited federal immigration law limiting judicial authority over such matters and concluded that the petition effectively sought to delay the execution of removal orders, which falls outside the court’s jurisdiction.
The court’s order noted that while it could not grant the requested relief, immigration authorities are still required to follow applicable legal procedures if detention or removal proceeds. Government attorneys said in court filings that Immigration and Customs Enforcement does not intend to detain the petitioners unless travel documents are secured.
"They made a serious mistake over 30 years ago, paid their debt to the community through serving their lengthy prison sentences, and have more than redeemed themselves for their past non-violent wrongs," the judge wrote.
"They are, unquestionably, contributing members of society here in the United States who have developed deep community ties through employment, familial relationships, homeownership, and much more. Yet, in what many would see as an inhumane decision, respondents feel the need to remove petitioners to a country petitioners do not call home and where they will be at risk of serious mistreatment."
Update, 4/20/27, 9:50 a.m. ET: This article has been updated with comment from the DHS
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines