Here’s how Utah’s ICE detainment process works, and what’s changed, immigration experts say

Note to readers • The Salt Lake Tribune is making this story free to all.

Para leer este artículo en español, haz clic aquí.

President Donald Trump’s administration is cracking down on immigration enforcement across the U.S., and Utah is no exception.

The Salt Lake Tribune spoke to immigration attorneys in the state to better understand what happens when someone is detained here by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Though each case is different, and circumstances vary, when someone is taken into ICE custody right now, much of what happens next is generally similar, they say.

Where do ICE detainees end up?

Immigration detainment in Utah typically starts in two ways: ICE detains someone directly, or ICE asks jails or other agencies to hold inmates for up to 48 hours after the person would have regularly been released, so ICE can then take custody of them.

In Utah, after someone is detained by ICE, they will typically be processed at ICE’s Salt Lake City Field Office in West Valley, Utah immigration and criminal defense attorney Adam Crayk said.

Once processed there, according to Crayk, ICE can either 1) issue a local bond and release someone while they wait for immigration court proceedings, or 2) transfer the detainee to an ICE facility.

Typically, a Utah detainee would be taken to Las Vegas, Nevada, though they sometimes may be sent to Aurora, Colorado. The Trump administration is also currently floating whether to begin detaining people at military sites across the U.S., including the possibility of holding people at Hill Air Force Base, The New York Times has reported. It remains unclear how the potential plan could one day affect local detainment.

For now, before being sent out of state, though, they are sometimes booked at the Salt Lake County Metro Jail.

When people are kept in jail on an ICE hold, they are considered civil detainees, and holding facilities are required to provide different accommodations that follow separate standards than those outlined for people being held on suspected criminal offenses or criminal charges.

According to detective Arlan Bennett, with the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office, the Salt Lake County jail is one of the few jails within Montana, Idaho, Nevada and Utah that ICE can book people in.

“We can meet all the qualifications and guidelines that ICE has for their detainees,” he said. “That’s one reason why our contract is in place.”

Sometimes, Bennett said, ICE will stop in Utah when coming from other states, though they will not hold out-of-state detainees in the Salt Lake County jail for longer than 72 hours.

According to Crayk, ICE has also started using their own facilities to hold people at their West Valley City field office.

Even if ICE denies a detainee a local bond and then takes them to a different state, detainees can still request a bond redetermination hearing before an immigration judge at their destination. Crayk said a judge would then aim to determine whether the person is a flight risk or a danger to the community.

According to the Executive Office for Immigration Review, immigrants can also request a bond redetermination hearing to ask a judge to reconsider a bond amount the detainee thinks was set too high.

Depending on the case, some are denied a bond hearing, and some who are granted a hearing are then denied a bond.

According to Crayk, immigrant removal proceedings typically move faster if someone remains in custody throughout the process. If someone was initially detained in Utah, for instance, this typically means they will stay in either Las Vegas or Aurora. But those with bonds can request to change their proceedings venue to Salt Lake City’s immigration court.

After bond decisions, or sometimes before — as Crayk said some individuals don’t understand they can challenge their custody status — immigrants then have master calendar hearings. Utah immigration attorney Kendall Moriarty said this is where judges take several people’s pleadings and figure out each person’s case schedule.

If detainees have an attorney, Crayk and Moriarty said, they can usually waive these hearings. If they don’t, Crayk said a detainee might have two or three of these hearings, so they have a chance to find representation.

Later on, a detainee will have a separate hearing, where the judge makes a final decision on their status.

The full process can take years, though the length varies, and not every detained immigrant gets a chance to appear before an immigration judge.

Amid the recent crackdown, though, fewer people could be released on bonds, attorneys say, and some who are deported may not get a case before a judge at all.

Times are changing

Utah immigration attorney Sergio Garcia said he believes there’s been a local uptick in people being detained by ICE. On separate occasions, he said ICE approached two of his clients at different Walmart stores to ask about their status. One had residency and was left alone. The other had pending asylum and was detained.

He also said a client who is a resident was recently questioned by a Customs and Border Patrol agent in a U.S. airport after the client returned home from another country. The agent specifically asked about a drug paraphernalia conviction from two years ago.

The client “had come and gone back-and-forth several times after this conviction,” and Garcia said they “had never had any issues.”

He said agents asked the client questions that had “nothing to do” with their conviction, like what kind of drug was in the paraphernalia, and that they were ultimately detained.

“It was marijuana,” Garcia explained. “For a lawful permanent resident, you could be deported if you have more than 30 grams. ... They took [them] in, apparently to investigate.”

He said the CBP agent tried to see if the client’s “record of conviction stated whether or not it was more or less than 30 grams.” The client was later released.

From legal status to gray area

Under federal policy changes implemented in recent weeks, some immigrants who had been shielded from detainment and possible deportation no longer have that security.

Trump’s administration, for instance, eliminated a humanitarian parole program started under former President Joe Biden that protected Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan and Venezuelan asylum-seekers. More than 500,000 such immigrants were allowed to enter the U.S. legally through the program, NPR reported.

According to Garcia, the program only granted temporary legal status. Once someone’s parole expired, they would need to find a new way to stay in the country legally. But that temporary legal status is no longer guaranteed.

Now, if an immigrant was granted parole “under a policy that may be paused, modified, or terminated,” ICE should exercise “enforcement discretion” when determining whether that person should be placed in removal proceedings and “whether parole remains appropriate,” read a Jan. 23 memo that then-acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Benjamin Huffman, sent to ICE leaders.

“They can now just basically go and round them all up and incarcerate them,” Crayk said. “This is someone who’s been paroled in. They’re walking around the United States right now; they have work permits; they’re working jobs, and all of a sudden that program is revoked.”

He said he’s had clients in this category, and that they are being treated as “arriving aliens” — a classification of immigrants that he said doesn’t qualify for an immigration bond “in front of an immigration judge,” though ICE officers have discretion to release them.

“This is one of the most horrific things I think we’ve ever done to people,” Crayk said. “‘Hey we let you in, you’re doing great! Oh, sorry, we’re now going to arrest you because we don’t believe in that program anymore.’”

How the Laken Riley Act is affecting immigration proceedings

Since Trump signed the Laken Riley Act into law on Jan. 29, fewer immigrants are qualifying for bond.

The law requires undocumented immigrants to remain detained throughout the removal process if they’re accused of violent and even minor theft crimes, such as shoplifting. It’s named after Laken Riley, who, as reported by The Associated Press, was a Georgia nursing student allegedly killed by a man in February 2024 who had been accused of illegal entry in September 2022 before he was released amid removal proceedings.

“You are allowing officers to detain based on allegations of retail theft. Not convictions — allegations,” Crayk said. “You don’t qualify for a bond. You are mandatorily detained.”

He said he wasn’t sure how judges could interpret it in future hearing proceedings, because it’s “putting retail theft in the same category as murder, rape and the aggravated felonies.”

“Is retail theft now such a horrific offense that there’s no set of circumstances that you could be granted asylum?” Crayk said.

Risk of expedited removal

Recently, the Department of Homeland Security has also expanded expedited removal, a process that allows ICE to send someone to their country of origin without giving them a chance to see an immigration judge.

According to the National Immigration Law Center, expedited removal was previously only used by ICE and CBP within 100 miles of the border and 14 days after someone’s arrival by land outside of an entry port, though it was less restrictive for people who arrived illegally by water.

Now, it can be used anywhere in the country to remove an undocumented immigrant who fails to prove they’ve lived here for at least two years.

One of Moriarty’s clients, for instance, is already scheduled for a final hearing in July 2027. But he’s been here for fewer than two years, and even though he’s in the process of seeking legal status, Moriarty said he could be detained, DHS could get his case dismissed and they could “fast track him for removal.”

And while she said she could theoretically appeal the decision to try to keep her client’s case, and a credible fear screening could prevent or at least delay her client from being deported, she’s doubtful she would win the appeal, or that the interview would save him under the current crackdown.

“The regulations say you’re not supposed to be able to reopen an expedited removal that’s been executed,” she said.

If he’s sent back, she thinks it’s likely he’ll be found and killed by those who have threatened his life before.

“But it would be more than that. They would take him, they would torture him, they would make an example of him,” she asserted. “Not only did he get away the last time, but he got away to the United States.”