Note here, since some in this discussion seem to have a magical view of the neutrality and protective value of anything called a "court", that immigration courts are administrative courts within the executive branch, not actual independent courts.

What are legal check ins? Did you mean immigration court hearings?

Also, what kind of entry necessitates check in with ICE?

> Some require regular check ins with ICE or an immigration judge to continue being here.

As far as I know check-ins with ICE mean that the individual has a court order to be deported, but for various reasons is not deported yet. I am not sure about the check ins mandated by the immigration judge, so cannot comment on that, but I would like to learn more.

> ICE told immigration judges to dismiss cases (based on a new memo being challenged) and enable immediate arrests.

How does it work? Does ICE have the authority over immigration judge? Like, what is the chain of command here?

> Additionally some folks who had continuing cases were getting arrested before the case concluded (e.g. asylum cases))

I think it happens because they were not admitted via the port of entry but rather crossed the border without inspection. Waiting for the asylum hearing by itself doesn’t mean you have the right to be in the country.

https://portal.ice.gov/immigration-guide/check-ins

>If you are released, you may have to go to regular check-in appointments as part of your immigration case. These are not the same as court appearances.

> Also, what kind of entry necessitates check in with ICE?

Asylum cases are one such type, there are more.

> > Some require regular check ins with ICE or an immigration judge to continue being here. > > As far as I know check-ins with ICE mean that the individual has a court order to be deported, but for various reasons is not deported yet.

Not necessarily.

> I am not sure about the check ins mandated by the immigration judge, so cannot comment on that, but I would like to learn more. >

Google it.

> > ICE told immigration judges to dismiss cases (based on a new memo being challenged) and enable immediate arrests. > > How does it work? Does ICE have the authority over immigration judge? Like, what is the chain of command here?

Google the long series of events for the most up to date and accurate info.

> > Additionally some folks who had continuing cases were getting arrested before the case concluded (e.g. asylum cases)) > > I think it happens because they were not admitted via the port of entry but rather crossed the border without inspection.

Based on what?

> Waiting for the asylum hearing by itself doesn’t mean you have the right to be in the country.

The folks already here have the right to due process.

So, one can check in with ICE because they are already supposed to be deported, and were released before the actual deportation had happened.

In this case it is safe to assume that is very likely that they were in the country illegally, or their status is no longer valid.

> Google it.

> Google the long series of events for the most up to date and accurate info.

Very informative.

> The folks already here have the right to due process.

They do have due process: immigration hearings are part of said process.

Expedited removals are part of the due process, too. I mean it's how the law is written.