Immigrants with asylum cases are increasingly missing their court hearings, leading to an increase in deportation orders. In McLean County, community members with ongoing immigrations cases said news headlines and social media posts are fueling fear and distrust in the legal immigration system.
Some asylees living in McLean County fear the legal pathway for remaining in the country is a trap for detention and deportation.
A moved to McLean County in 2022 seeking asylum from South America, abandoning what she considered a successful career in health care and a life built around retirement plans in her country. WGLT granted A anonymity, using only her first initial and region of origin due to fear of repercussions.
A's plans changed when her husband helped the victim of a crime file charges against his superior, a major player in her country's politics with connections in the police department, said A.
His identity was leaked and threats began in lockstep, she said, first by phone, then it escalated.
"In a country where there is corruption and impunity, it is very difficult to come forward to report a crime," A said. “The violence and impunity go hand in hand. It’s sad because Latin America is rich in biodiversity and culture, but corruption, cartel wars and drug trafficking cause families to migrate. It won't stop as long as there is corruption.”
One day while walking home from work, her husband noticed a motorcycle trailing behind. He tried to outrun the man on the vehicle. “He came home with his pants torn. For me, seeing him like that was devastating," said A. “When you see the people you love the most being harmed, when you see them in their more vulnerable moment, you do whatever you need to do.”
That close encounter was a decisive moment for her and her family. They packed their suitcases and told the kids they were spending the holidays with family in the U.S.
“There was such ambiguity at the airport the day we left; my husband and I knew what we were coming for, but for the children, we wanted it to look like a snowy vacation,” she said.
Fearful not to tip off the perpetrator about their escape plans, A said they didn't share their ordeal with family in the U.S. until they landed.
“My family said the U.S. is a much safer country, and they helped us find an attorney,” she said.
Within weeks, they filed their asylum petition. A said a sense of relief washed over them.
Their sense of peace was short-lived, and hope for a resolution in their asylum case was shattered after President Trump’s inauguration when changes to the immigration system accelerated at a pace the couple had not seen before, said A.
By summertime, videos of immigration court hearings ending in violent arrests began circulating on the news and social media platforms. A said those images are hard to watch.
"All you have to do is click on the news or social media and the videos are there. It's at the click of a button."
A said her family feels a different kind of fear in the U.S.
“The fear we had in our country was that my husband would not come home. The fear we have now is that they’ll separate us,” she said.
A and her husband are on edge about the presence of Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] officials. An immigration nonprofit in Central Illinois, the Immigration Project, reported the presence of ICE agents in Bloomington-Normal in January. They keep their legal documents on hand in case they’re stopped by immigration law enforcement.
A said checking the mail brings dread.
"We used to await our letter for our court hearing with excitement, but now, there is so much uncertainty." she said, adding it's tough knowing so many things could go wrong.
Fear vs. reality
Federal data analyzed by immigration nonprofit Mobile Pathways [MP] states the number of immigration hearings that end in arrest is low. MP compared records from ICE and the Executive Office for Immigration Review for hearings between May and July 2025—the months when arrests spiked—versus removal orders for missed immigration hearings.
According to MP, 1.8 in 100 hearings ended in arrest. That sits in stark contrast to the nearly 100% of missed court hearings that end in deportation orders.
Deportation orders issued for missed immigration hearings are called “in absentia removals.”
According to federal data analyzed by Mobile Pathways, in 2025 McLean County had 92 deportation orders, three times that of 2024. Peoria County's 98 orders for 2025 were all within Greater Peoria.
It's unclear how many of those deportation orders were “in absentia removals”.
Immigration attorney and executive director for the Immigration Project, Charlotte Alvarez, said it’s unfortunate more people are skipping their immigration court appointments and receiving in absentia removal orders.
“Often what we hear in the news, or what people hear about is the one bad experience, or the one story,” said Alvarez about the fear among immigrants with pending asylum cases.
“And I think a lot of people are trying to make these life-altering legal decisions based on what their ‘tia’ told them or videos that they saw on Tiktok,” and not based on legal counsel.
"What you don't hear is that many people are having their cases heard and they are going through that legal process of defending their case," Alvarez said, but she said it's a calculus the individual has to make.
"Asylees’ fears are valid," and the Trump administration and the immigration system are making it a scary process, she said, "sometimes on purpose.”
One example is when asylees are sent to different country by an immigration judge to wait for the resolution of their case. These orders are called Third Country Removals.
“Third country removals are being used as a tactic in this administration more than we’ve ever seen them be used before,” Alvarez said.
For people seeking safety and stability in the U.S., the idea of being sent to a country they’ve never been to and has no connection to, is "unconscionable" she said.
The U.S. has third country removal agreements with 22 countries. These are known as Asylum Cooperative Agreements. Some of those countries include El Salvador, Honduras and Uganda.
“It’s just a ridiculous solution,” Alvarez said.
Yet, despite the risks, Alvarez said there’s only way to win an asylum case.
“The only way to obtain success and stability for someone who has a real, valid claim for asylum case is to go to court and to prove that case in court.”
Grounds for asylum shifting
Pursuing an asylum case should be made with the guidance of legal counsel, especially because the criteria once considered standard for granting asylum is changing rapidly, said Alvarez.
"If an individual has faced death threats, you would think that seems enough for me, right? If someone is threatening to kill me, I would be pretty terrified, but then this administration, it just came out with a court case recently, saying, nope, that's not sufficient to qualify for asylum."
Alvarez said we should depend on our laws to make decisions, “but our immigration legal system is being dismantled, and the laws are changing on a daily basis,” she said.
When people can't rely on those laws staying the same, Alvarez said, “it's become a real challenge.”
Immigration judge Jeremiah Johnson of San Francisco is the vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges. He said there are five grounds for granting asylum: nationality, race, religion, politics and membership in a particular social group.
Alvarez said that doesn't mean fear of death is not relevant under asylum law but rather represents the nuance of the Board of Immigration Appeals [BIA]. The BIA has the authority to overturn an immigration judge's decision.
She said the evidence must show that a reasonable person in the applicant’s position would fear persecution, "on account of a protected ground, and that relocation within the home country is not a reasonable option," she said.
These requirements remain rooted in longstanding legal standards for "well-founded fear” and persecution, which require both subjective fear and objective evidence that persecution is sufficiently likely," Alvarez said.
Johnson said death threats “rarely” establish past persecution. He cited the case of a Peruvian news broadcaster whose interview with Peruvian President, Pedro Castillo, turned hostile and resulted in threats and harassment. The judge determined the asylee had not suffered harm rising to the level of persecution.
Johnson also said the BIA stopped recognizing gender plus nationality as membership in a particular social group.
“So, cases where you were granting asylum based on domestic violence, gender-based violence, are no longer —well— it seems less likely they’d be granted. The laws changed," he said.
The shrinking framework for granting asylum is seen in the spike of denial rates, another factor influencing missed asylum hearings. Johnson and Alvarez said that’s because experienced immigration judges are being replaced with military judges.
“We are seeing former ICE agents being promoted to judges, who are then making that initial decision. And so, the rates of denial are going up,” Alvarez said.
Johnson was among a group of immigration justices fired by the Trump administration in November. He said the firings are a strategy to employ less experienced judges on the bench.
“Without that experience, you have a more maybe pliable bench. You have people that are not willing to stand up. You also don't have the same training. You have people there who are not experts in the law,” said Johnson.
He said he’s worked with military judges and former ICE attorneys that were "excellent jurors and deep thinkers of the law" that were invested in their position.
The crux of the issue is the rapid pace of training for newly hired judges. He said a six-month detail, perhaps for a military judge, might not have the same investment to fully understand the pace of the court and how to do their job.
He said the consequences for errors can be fatal.
“I mean, these are people who fear for their life, and if you get it right, you've just saved someone's life. If you get it wrong, they may die. So you have to take this job very seriously,” he said.
Alvarez said denial rates in Illinois are better than in other states, and she’s even seen asylum cases granted by military judges. But "where you live shouldn’t determine whether your case is approved.
“It should matter if you have the legal definition for asylum met or not, and that’s not what we’re seeing,” she said.
The asylum process at the immigration court level is also becoming more difficult. Alvarez said asylees without legal counsel are struggling because they lack the ability to appeal their case at the federal level.
“That’s kind of the next step up, and federal courts are often able to find if the decision was wrongly made at that immigration court level,” she said.
But the process is long even with legal representation.
Trepidation towards naturalization
For asylees with Green Card status, the next step is applying for U.S. citizenship, a step that P, a McLean County resident from South Asia granted anonymity by WGLT, said she was looking forward to taking.
For P, stability is simply being able to show up to work tomorrow or take her father to his next doctor’s appointment without fear. Despite living in the U.S. for 8 years, the family remains in the crossfire. P said the inability to plan for the future is a heavy burden.
“I do not have stability currently, emotionally either. I am always worried about what will happen. Hopefully rules won’t keep changing,” P said.
To help families like P's cope with these fears, Alvarez works to bridge the gap between fear and the law. Alvarez said "indiscriminate" actions are becoming more common as legal pathways narrow.
"Sometimes we'll file cases around the same time, and one case will be held up, and another will go through and or take longer. We don't know why, and we don't know why some of these actions are being taken, or where the focus is going to be," Alvarez said.
P said she and her family keep a "low profile" to avoid any interaction that might cause a disturbance to their status due to an accent or the color of their skin. She said she's seen videos of people being racially profiled by ICE. She fears her father will be apprehended based on his appearance.
“He is brown... I am trying to get my dad to stay home more because I'm so scared of him being pulled aside and he doesn’t understand English that well.”
“None of this is supposed to be punishment”
Alvarez explained that while the system is civil in name, the experience for those within it is often criminal punishment.
"I think it's really important to remember at every part of our immigration process that our immigration laws are civil codes in a large portion, and this whole immigration court system is a civil court process. None of this is criminal court, and none of this is supposed to be punishment, but it is increasingly used, and the effects on people are very similar to our criminal justice system,” she said.
The possible citizenship interview, which once felt like a milestone for many naturalized citizens, has become a source of anxiety for many. P said having an attorney present is the only way her family feels safe enough to go forward with the interview.
“There are news that I see here and there, that scares me, just ICE agents coming and taking people away during the citizenship interview, and we worry about that happening to us," she said.
She feels secure her rights won't be violated if legal counsel is present.
Alvarez urged families to seek professional advice before acting on fear or information found on social media.
"I would say the first step is to talk to an immigration attorney or accredited representative and to get an individual consultation and go from there. The consultation has no consequences, right?”
For P, a "humane" system wouldn't be defined by case numbers or accents, but by empathy.
“Honestly, not to judge by the way people look, because everybody has been through stuff... there's always circumstances that led them to be in the U.S.A.,” she said.
