A 53-year-old Indian-origin woman, Meenu Batra, who has spent over three decades in the United States working as a court interpreter, has been detained by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, raising questions about immigration enforcement and long-standing legal statuses.
Batra, a certified interpreter in Hindi, Punjabi, and Urdu, was detained on March 17 at Valley International Airport in Texas while travelling to Wisconsin for an immigration court assignment. She is currently being held at a detention facility near the US-Mexico border. Her detention comes despite her long professional career assisting immigrants within the US legal system and her family ties, including a son who recently joined the US Army.
The basis of the action lies in a removal order issued in 2000. Although Batra was granted “withholding of removal” at the time—meaning she could not be deported to India due to the risk of persecution—the order itself was never cancelled. This legal distinction allows authorities to detain her and potentially deport her to a third country willing to accept her, even though she cannot be sent back to India.
Her attorneys have challenged the detention by filing a habeas corpus petition in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, arguing that her continued custody is unlawful. They have also raised concerns about her treatment, alleging that she was held without food or water for nearly 24 hours and has since faced inconsistent access to medical care. Batra, who reportedly underwent surgery in late 2025, is said to have developed a respiratory illness while in custody.
Batra’s legal team maintains that her current status remains valid for several more years and permits her to live and work in the United States. They argue that enforcement action in such cases reflects stricter immigration policies that allow authorities to act on old removal orders, even for individuals who have lived in the country for decades without further violations.
Her case also highlights the complexities of US immigration law, particularly the difference between asylum and withholding of removal. While both provide protection from deportation to a specific country, withholding of removal does not grant a pathway to permanent residency and leaves individuals vulnerable to detention or relocation to third countries.
The US Department of Homeland Security has been directed by the court to respond to the petition by April 21. The outcome of the case could have broader implications for similarly placed individuals who hold long-standing but limited immigration protections in the United States.
