At least 52 spouses and parents of active-duty U.S. service members have been detained by immigration authorities since President Donald Trump returned to office. At least six have been deported and one has left the country voluntarily, according to an Associated Press review.
The U.S. government has special immigration provisions for certain family members of service members. But those provisions have not prevented military families from being detained or deported during the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
The Associated Press found that at least 52 parents and spouses of active-duty service members have been detained since Trump began his second term. At least six have been deported, one has self-deported and at least eight immediate family members of service members remained in federal immigration custody at the time of the AP’s review.
The cases are significant because the federal government does not maintain a separate count of military family members who are detained or deported. The AP compiled its figures by examining thousands of federal court records, reviewing news reports and confirming cases with family members and attorneys. The newspaper described its count as the first accounting of such detentions and said it is likely an undercount.
The numbers
52 — spouses and parents of active-duty service members detained
6 — deported
1 — self-deported
8+ — immediate family members still in federal immigration custody when the AP conducted its review
The figures do not represent an official government total.
What protection do military families have?
One of the principal programs is known as Military Parole in Place, or PIP.
The program allows certain spouses, parents and children of active-duty service members and veterans to request parole while remaining in the United States. USCIS describes parole and deferred action as discretionary options that are considered on a case-by-case basis.
The program was created during the George W. Bush administration in 2007 and later codified under President Barack Obama. Military recruiters have promoted it as one of the immigration benefits available to qualifying families of service members.
But Military Parole in Place is not automatic citizenship or permanent legal status.
USCIS says the benefit is discretionary and may be granted in one-year increments. The agency’s policy manual also says parole in place is generally granted only sparingly.
That distinction has become increasingly important.
A person can be the spouse or parent of an active-duty service member and still lack lawful immigration status. Having a family member in the military does not itself prevent immigration authorities from enforcing immigration law.
The Department of Homeland Security has emphasized that point, saying military service alone does not automatically provide lawful immigration status or exempt a person from immigration consequences.
The wait for protection can take months
The AP found that the processing time for military parole in place has increased during Trump’s second term.
According to USCIS data reviewed by the AP, the average processing time has more than doubled to about 12 months. That means some military family members can spend months waiting for a decision while remaining vulnerable to immigration enforcement.
In some cases, family members were detained while pursuing immigration relief.
That has created a gap between the protection that military families are told may be available and the protection they actually receive.
The effect on service members
The consequences extend beyond the person being detained.
When a spouse or parent is taken into custody, service members can suddenly lose a caregiver for their children or their primary source of emotional and financial support.
The AP found cases in which service members took leave from their military duties or delayed deployments after relatives were detained. Former military officials and immigration experts have warned that such cases can affect morale, readiness and the ability of service members to concentrate on their assignments.
For some families, the problem is especially complicated because the service member may be stationed far from home or preparing for deployment.
The immigration case then becomes a military problem as well as a family problem.
One soldier’s father was deported
Air Force Tech. Sgt. Wendy Gbeve experienced that directly when her father, Luis Alberto Ramirez Zavala, was detained during what was supposed to be a routine immigration appointment.
Gbeve told the AP that she spent hours trying to determine where immigration authorities had taken her father. He was moved from a county jail in Missouri to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Texas.
About two weeks after his detention, she learned that he had been deported to Mexico.
Ramirez Zavala had lived in the United States for most of his life and worked as a ranch hand in rural Illinois, according to the AP. Gbeve said she was not given a clear explanation for why he was removed so quickly.
Her experience illustrates the uncertainty facing military families whose relatives are in the immigration system.
The service member may have a legal military status. The parent or spouse may have an immigration application pending. But those two systems do not necessarily provide the same protection.
A soldier who patrolled the border
The issue has also reached service members who have participated directly in immigration-related military missions.
Army Specialist Romero Ralios’ father, Sebastian Ralios Tino, was detained after living in the United States for nearly two decades.
Ralios had previously spent nine months supporting U.S. Customs and Border Protection as part of the Joint Task Force Southern Border.
His father’s detention left him questioning his own role in the immigration enforcement effort, according to the AP.
The soldier’s commanding officer, Capt. Mohamed Elmaola, told the AP that Ralios was a strong soldier and that supporting service members and their families was important to military leadership.
The case illustrates the tension at the center of the issue: service members can be assigned to support immigration enforcement while their own relatives are simultaneously subject to that enforcement.
