ICE Detains Hong Kong Residents Protected From Deportation as Congress Proposes Permanent Residency

Protection Through February 2027 Has Not Prevented Arrests

At least 12 Hong Kong residents protected from deportation under a presidential directive have been detained at U.S. airports since June 2026, according to immigration lawyers. Judges subsequently ordered their release after periods in custody ranging from 10 days to two months, but they remained subject to ankle monitors and restrictions on their movements.

The arrests have exposed a gap between what Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) guarantees and how immigration authorities are treating people covered by it. The current directive defers removal of eligible Hong Kong residents through February 5, 2027, and provides access to employment authorization. It does not grant an immigration status or permanent residence.

That distinction is central to the case of Ho Yin Mo, an employee of California Assemblywoman Catherine Stefani. Immigration agents detained him at Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas on September 17. An immigration judge granted release on bond on September 30, and he left detention on October 2. His removal proceedings continue.

Congressional Democrats are proposing a more durable solution. On October 6, Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts introduced the Hong Konger Promise of Refuge Act, which would allow eligible DED recipients and their families to apply for permanent residence. The proposal is not law, and no extension of the existing protection has been announced.

What the Federal Directive Actually Provides

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) set out the current rules in its April 4, 2025, Federal Register notice. It implements former President Joe Biden's January 15, 2025, memorandum extending and expanding protection through February 5, 2027.

The notice describes DED as a presidential administrative deferral of removal, rather than an immigration status. It also states that people covered by the directive are not subject to removal during the designated period. Coverage itself requires no application to USCIS, although obtaining employment authorization documentation generally requires a separate filing.

Eligible residents generally include those covered by the preceding DED period and Hong Kong residents who have been present in the United States since January 15, 2025. Continuous residence and the listed exclusions matter. Being from Hong Kong or having arrived before the cutoff does not, by itself, establish eligibility in every case.

The definition is broader than citizenship. It includes people of any nationality, or without nationality, who hold qualifying documents such as a Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport, British National Overseas passport, British Overseas Citizen passport, Hong Kong Permanent Identity Card or Hong Kong document of identity for visa purposes.

Exclusions include certain security grounds, extradition, a felony conviction or two or more misdemeanor convictions in the United States, and specified government determinations concerning public safety or foreign policy. Voluntary return to Hong Kong or mainland China after January 15, 2025, also excludes a person from protection. Prior participation in democracy activism is not a general eligibility requirement.

Why DHS Says Removal Proceedings Can Continue

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) distinguishes between placing someone in removal proceedings and physically removing that person from the country. A department spokesman defended enforcement against people holding temporary administrative protection while saying the government was not currently removing them.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is not precluded from placing aliens with such temporary administrative designation into removal proceedings, nor is it currently removing them. Work authorization or a pending application do not confer legal status in the United States.

Some Hong Kong residents entered on student or visitor visas and stayed under DED protection after their original permission to remain expired, immigration attorney Willis Fu Yiu-wai explained. The directive can protect them from removal without converting their earlier visa into permanent residence. Fu warned that securing permanent residency through another route could take years.

That explains how valid work authorization and an expired period of admission can coexist. It does not settle whether detention is lawful in a particular case. Washington immigration lawyer Samuel Bickett, who specializes in Hong Kong cases, said courts had ruled in favor of release on bond or found detention unlawful in every such case he had handled so far.

The distinction also limits what a release order proves. Release on bond does not necessarily resolve eligibility for DED or end removal proceedings. Without the individual court orders, the precise legal reasoning cannot be established for every person released.

Mo Is Released, but His Immigration Case Continues

Mo was held at Nevada Southern Detention Center in Pahrump for approximately two weeks. DHS said he had entered the United States temporarily on January 13, 2020, and failed to leave by May 15, 2020. The White House called him "an illegal alien," while Stefani maintained that he was lawfully employed by the California Legislature.

Friends and lawyers familiar with Hong Kong immigration protections said Mo was likely covered by DED. One friend who also relies on the program said he knew Mo qualified. DHS had not answered a specific question about Mo's DED eligibility in the reporting before his release. His coverage should therefore not be presented as a publicly confirmed agency determination.

Stefani, a Democrat representing San Francisco, welcomed his release and defended his work as a public employee.

Mo's release confirms what we knew all along: He is a lawful public servant and a cherished part of our Bay Area family, and he should never have been detained.

Mo studied at the University of California, Berkeley, worked as a reporter for a Chinese language television station in San Francisco and joined Stefani's team in 2025. His duties included helping constituents navigate state agencies and interpreting for Chinese speaking residents. San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie wrote to the judge supporting his release, and Representative Kevin Mullin also publicly supported him.

ICE said after his release that Mo was out on bond pending removal proceedings and repeated its position that he lacked lawful immigration status. No date for his next hearing has been identified. His professional history and public support do not themselves resolve the separate legal questions about his immigration position.

What the Detention Numbers Do and Do Not Show

The figure of at least 12 refers to Hong Kong residents whom lawyers identified as protected by DED and detained at airports since June. Reports also describe arrests at municipal transport hubs. The 12 were held for between 10 days and two months before judges ordered their release, with electronic monitoring and movement restrictions continuing afterward.

A broader dataset gives a different count. Records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by the Deportation Data Project show that ICE detained 38 Hong Kong citizens between January 1 and August 6, 2026. Those records do not establish why each person was detained or whether each qualified for DED.

Academic researchers separately identified at least two dozen other Hong Kong residents detained during the year, but their eligibility for protection and current custody status were unclear. These counts should not be added together: their time periods and definitions differ, and the people counted may overlap.

Bickett estimated that at least 3,000 people in the United States were covered by Hong Kong DED, with the actual number possibly closer to 7,000. That is an attorney's estimate, not an official USCIS total. The uncertainty in both population and detention figures prevents a reliable calculation of the share of protected residents arrested.

The reported pattern is nevertheless consistent across several accounts. Lawyers place the beginning of airport arrests in June, and Bickett said he had become aware of at least a couple of arrests a week. The evidence establishes repeated detention of people said to be protected, rather than a verified count of everyone affected nationwide.

Pressure to Leave and Fear of Domestic Travel

Lawyers said their clients were threatened with prolonged or indefinite detention unless they agreed to depart voluntarily. A Hong Kong resident detained while preparing to board a flight at Chicago O'Hare International Airport in July described being pressured to sign a voluntary departure document and warned of months in jail if he refused.

These are allegations from detainees and their representatives, not findings established for every arrest. They describe a practical concern distinct from immediate deportation: a person protected from forced removal may still feel compelled to agree to leave because of the prospect of remaining in custody.

The arrests have also changed travel decisions within the Hong Kong community. Friends of Mo described canceled flights and warnings circulating through private messages. Evelyn Wiese, a program director at the Asian Law Caucus, said DED itself imposes no limits on domestic travel.

International travel is different. USCIS requires covered residents seeking to leave and request reentry to apply for advance travel authorization using Form I-131. Leaving without it may end eligibility or prevent reentry. Voluntary return to Hong Kong or mainland China can disqualify a person even if advance travel authorization was obtained. Those rules should not be confused with travel restrictions imposed after release from detention.

A Bill Would Create a Route to Permanent Residence

Hong Kong Watch, an advocacy organization, described the proposed Hong Konger Promise of Refuge Act in its October 6 statement on the bill. It identifies the House and Senate measures as H.R.10685 and S.5606, introduced by McGovern and Merkley respectively.

Under the organization's account, DED recipients would have one year after enactment to apply to USCIS for permanent residence. Eligible spouses and children could apply too. Applicants would need continuous U.S. residence, no return to Hong Kong or mainland China, and no felony or multiple misdemeanor convictions. While applications were pending, applicants would be protected from removal and authorized to work.

The proposal concerns a defined group already in the United States rather than an ongoing program for new arrivals. Hong Kong Watch compares its design with the Chinese Student Protection Act of 1992, which provided permanent residence to eligible Chinese nationals in the United States following the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Ray Wong, Hong Kong Watch's policy and strategy advisor, argued that legislation would replace an expiring administrative promise with lasting protection for people already admitted and screened.

This bill finishes the job for a small group of people who are already here and have already been screened. Sending them back would put them at the mercy of a government that has already put a price on the heads of people like them.

The bill reportedly had no Republican cosponsors at the time of the October 12 account. No committee hearing or vote date has been identified. Its proposed application window would begin only after enactment, not from the date of introduction.

The Risks That Prompted Protection Have Not Disappeared

The Biden administration first introduced Hong Kong DED in August 2021 after the imposition of Hong Kong's June 2020 national security law. The January 2025 memorandum, reproduced in the USCIS notice, presents safe haven as serving U.S. foreign policy interests through protection of democracy and human rights.

Hong Kong Watch says the national security law claims jurisdiction over acts committed anywhere in the world. It points to police bounties of up to HK$1 million, equivalent to US$127,400 in its statement, for overseas democracy activists, with the most recent cited round in July 2025.

Pressure inside Hong Kong has continued as well. The July bookstore raids led to five arrests over allegedly seditious publications at two independent shops. That case concerns different people and does not establish the risk facing any particular DED recipient, but it illustrates the continuing enforcement environment behind concerns about return.

Former U.S. Consul General in Hong Kong Hanscom Smith said detaining protected Hong Kong residents conflicts with the policy's purpose. Frances Hui, policy manager at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, said the community had received a clear signal that the government was not considering renewal. DHS had not formally answered whether it would extend DED, so that assessment is not a confirmed government decision.

The Dates That Matter Next

The events span the creation of temporary protection, a new period of arrests and a legislative response. The central dates are:

• August 2021: The Biden administration introduces DED for eligible Hong Kong residents.
• January 15, 2025: Biden issues the memorandum extending and expanding protection through February 5, 2027.
• April 4, 2025: USCIS publishes implementation rules for employment authorization and travel.
• June 2026: Lawyers say airport detentions of protected Hong Kong residents begin.
• September 17, 2026: ICE detains Ho Yin Mo at Harry Reid International Airport.
• September 30 and October 2, 2026: A judge grants Mo release on bond, and he subsequently leaves custody.
• October 6, 2026: Merkley and McGovern introduce permanent residency legislation.
• February 5, 2027: The current DED and associated employment authorization period is scheduled to end.

The employment deadline is concrete. USCIS automatically extended qualifying DED employment cards bearing category A11 and expiration dates of February 5, 2023, or February 5, 2025, through February 5, 2027. A date printed on such a card can therefore have passed while the document remains valid under the extension.

Under the current notice, employers cannot continue accepting the specified A11 cards after February 5, 2027. Workers would need other evidence of continued employment authorization by February 6. Employers also may not demand proof of Hong Kong residency when completing Form I-9 employment verification.

Whether DED will be renewed, whether Congress will enact the residency proposal and how individual removal cases will conclude remain undecided. The February deadline does not itself establish that every protected person will be deported immediately, but it places both protection from removal and continued work authorization at risk unless another legal basis applies.

Key Points

• Lawyers identified at least 12 protected Hong Kong residents detained at airports since June 2026 and later released under monitoring and movement restrictions.
• DED defers removal through February 5, 2027, but is not an immigration status or a route to permanent residence.
• Ho Yin Mo left detention on October 2 after a bond ruling. His removal proceedings continue.
• A separate count of 38 Hong Kong citizens detained through August 6 does not establish DED eligibility.
• The Hong Konger Promise of Refuge Act would create a permanent residency application route if enacted.
• No renewal decision, legislative vote date or final resolution of Mo's case has been announced.