A federal judge in California has temporarily blocked enforcement against a self-deported illegal immigrant from Milwaukee, ruling that Immigration and Customs Enforcement likely acted unlawfully by requiring her to leave while her T-visa application for alleged human trafficking victims remained pending. The May 2026 order from U.S. District Judge André Birotte Jr. directs federal officials to allow Yessenia Ruano to return to the United States and requires a review of her case before any future removal efforts.
Ruano, a former teacher’s aide in the Milwaukee Public School District, crossed the border illegally from El Salvador in 2011. She was later placed in removal proceedings. An immigration judge denied her application for withholding of removal in 2023. She then pursued a T-visa, a special visa for victims of human trafficking who cooperate with law enforcement. Critics have long questioned the timing and strength of such claims filed years after illegal entry and after other forms of relief failed.
In May 2025, under the Trump administration’s enforcement push, ICE denied Ruano’s request for a stay and instructed her to self-deport by early June. She left voluntarily for El Salvador with her 10-year-old U.S.-citizen twin daughters rather than face formal removal. Several Democratic politicians and advocacy groups criticized the enforcement action as harsh. U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore described it as “outright cruel” to return a claimed trafficking victim to her home country.
Media narratives heavily hyped the dangers she would face upon return, using her story as a political prop to attack immigration enforcement and paint even the basic removal of individuals with final orders as tantamount to a death sentence. In fact, State Senators Chris Larson and Tim Carpenter erroneously claimed Ruano had died in El Salvador shortly after her return. In reality, Ruano safely self-deported and began rebuilding her life in El Salvador, focusing on housing and job training while expressing hope for a future return if her legal efforts succeeded. Following this order, Ruano is now pushing for her husband to be allowed to return to the States with her.
Now Birotte, a California federal judge, has intervened. In a case brought by advocacy groups challenging ICE policies on “blind removal” of certain applicants, the judge issued a temporary order allowing Ruano and other plaintiffs to return. He found ICE’s actions “likely unlawful” for failing to first obtain a prima facie determination from USCIS on whether her T-visa application met basic eligibility thresholds before proceeding with removal.
DHS officials pushed back, noting that the agency complies with court orders even as “radical NGOs shop for the most favorable forum, and activist judges seek to thwart our operations.” Enforcing immigration law, they stated, remains essential to national security, public safety, and the rule of law.
Conservatives see the ruling as another example of judicial overreach by a single district judge in a friendly jurisdiction, hamstringing nationwide enforcement. Activist judges in California are attempting to override executive branch actions and dictate outcomes for individuals who have already voluntarily left the country. Ruano had years of due process, a denied claim for protection, and chose self-deportation rather than remain in violation. Using the slow, backlogged T-visa application process should not create an indefinite shield for those with final removal orders, especially after more than a decade of unlawful presence and employment in a public school system.
