ICE Detains Karoline Leavitt’s Sister In Law


This article may contain commentary
which reflects the author’s opinion.


Authorities have taken a woman with family ties to White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt into custody as part of President Donald Trump’s ongoing immigration enforcement efforts. Bruna Ferreira was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Revere, Massachusetts, according to a report Tuesday night from Boston’s WCVB.

Advertisement

Ferreira, who has an 11-year-old son with Michael Leavitt — the press secretary’s brother — emigrated from Brazil as a child. She is currently being held at an ICE facility in Louisiana.

Michael Leavitt, a resident of New Hampshire, informed WMUR that his son lives with him and his wife full-time. He mentioned that Ferreira maintains a relationship with her son, but added that his son has not spoken to Ferreira since her arrest several weeks ago.

Michael Leavitt said in a statement that his “only concern has always been the safety, well-being, and privacy of [his] son.”

Ferreira’s attorney said his client came to the U.S. under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which was imposed by then-President Barack Obama.

“She’s in the process of actually getting her residency and she was abruptly arrested and taken from her young child right before Thanksgiving,” her attorney Todd Pomerleau told WCVB, according to a statement from a source who spoke to the outlet.

Advertisement

“This individual is the mother of Karoline’s nephew and they have not spoken in many years,” the source added. “The child has lived full-time in New Hampshire with his father since he was born. He has never resided with his mother.”

A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson also issued a statement.

Advertisement

“ICE arrested Bruna Caroline Ferreria, a criminal illegal alien from Brazil. She has a previous arrest for battery. She entered the U.S. on a B2 tourist visa that required her to depart the U.S. by June 6, 1999,” the statement said. “She is currently at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center and is in removal proceedings. Under President Trump and Secretary Noem, all individuals unlawfully present in the United States are subject to deportation.”

Her attorney, however, disputed the government’s claim that his client has a criminal history, but he did not address her status of allegedly being in the U.S. illegally.

“Bruna has no criminal record whatsoever,” he said. “I don’t know where that is coming from. Show us the proof. There’s no charges out there. She’s not a criminal illegal alien.”

Meanwhile, earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the Trump administration’s request to pause a lower court injunction that had blocked deportations of individuals to third countries without prior notice.

The decision marks a near-term victory for the administration as it aims to implement its immigration crackdown swiftly.

The Court ruled 6-3 in favor of staying the injunction, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.

The case involved a group of migrants contesting their deportations to third countries—nations other than their countries of origin.

Lawyers for the migrants had urged the Supreme Court to uphold a ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, who had ordered the Trump administration to keep all migrants facing deportation to third countries in U.S. custody until further review.

Murphy, based in Boston, oversaw a class-action lawsuit brought by migrants challenging deportations to countries such as South Sudan, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and others that the administration has reportedly considered in its ongoing deportation efforts.

Advertisement

Murphy ruled that migrants must stay in U.S. custody until they have the opportunity to undergo a “reasonable fear interview,” allowing them to explain to U.S. officials any fears of persecution or torture if released into the country.

Murphy emphasized that his order does not prevent Trump from “executing removal orders to third countries.” Rather, he clarified in a prior ruling that it “simply requires” the government to “comply with the law when carrying out” such removals.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *