Judge Orders Immediate Release of El Paso DACA Recipient Catalina “Xóchitl” Santiago

El Paso, Texas — A federal judge has ruled that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) must immediately release Catalina “Xóchitl” Santiago, a DACA recipient who had been detained at an immigration facility in El Paso. The judge found that her detention violates her constitutional rights under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Background and Legal Ruling

Judge Kathleen Cardone, appointed by President George W. Bush, determined that the Trump administration failed to present evidence justifying Santiago’s continued detention, especially given that she has a long history of lawful residence and was not shown to be a danger to the community.

Cardone ordered ICE to release Santiago no later than Thursday at 4 p.m. and to notify the court of her exact release time.

Santiago, now 28, came to the U.S. from Mexico at age 8. She has held DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) status for years and had her renewal approved seven times. Her most recent DACA status is valid until April 2026.

Her detention stemmed from her arrest by Border Patrol agents at El Paso International Airport in August, while she was en route to a work-related conference with her spouse, Desiree Miller, a U.S. citizen.

Despite the immigration judge’s earlier decision stopping her deportation, ICE appealed and kept her in custody. Federal authorities had also cited a prior arrest in Arizona as justification, but no convictions corresponded to that incident.

Implications and Reactions

Advocates for immigrant rights hailed the ruling as a validation of constitutional protections for DACA recipients. “There is no legitimate interest in her detention,” Judge Cardone wrote, emphasizing that the government failed to articulate individualized reasons for holding her.

ICE must comply with the judge’s order and release Santiago by the stipulated deadline. The court’s decision underscores that even amid broader immigration tensions, detaining individuals protected under DACA without clear cause may run afoul of constitutional rights.

The case also raises broader questions about how DACA protects individuals in the face of detention and deportation proceedings, particularly in states like Texas where legal challenges to the program persist.