CIVIL DISCOURSE: ICE relocates woman claiming Maryland birth before court order takes effect

By Jason Whong

A woman who claims U.S. citizenship was held in Baltimore by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and has been sent to Louisiana, her attorney says. But a federal court order that would have kept her in Maryland for court proceedings didn’t become effective until after her removal, and the case may go on for weeks before each side has had their say, court records show.

The woman and ICE disagree not only over whether she is an American citizen, but also about her name and birthplace. The woman is listed in court records as Dulce Consuelo Diaz Morales, and in ICE records as Dulce Consuelo Madrigal Diaz.

Her attorney, Victoria Slatton, partner at Sanabria & Associates, says Diaz Morales was born in Laurel, and has a Maryland birth certificate. Slatton says she has also contacted the hospital in Laurel and confirmed her client was a patient during the general time period of her birth. ICE records say she was born in Mexico. She is now held at ICE’s Richwood Correctional Center in Richwood, Louisiana, the records show.

Slatton wrote on LinkedIn Dec. 19 that ICE arrested Diaz Morales earlier in the week in Baltimore, then sent her to Louisiana while litigation was pending.

“What is most alarming is not just the detention of a U.S. citizen, but the willingness to disregard primary evidence of citizenship and isolate her through interstate transfer while counsel was actively engaged,” Slatton wrote on LinkedIn Dec. 19.

“We have her birth certificate. That should be enough,” Slatton said on a video posted to TikTok. “She never should have been picked up in the first place.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security who declined to provide a name maintained that she was not a U.S. citizen, and didn’t give them a U.S. birth certificate or evidence to support a claim of citizenship. The spokesperson also said ICE encountered her in 2023 near Lukeville, Arizona, where she said she was a Mexican citizen.

“Her case is being adjudicated and she is receiving full due process,” the spokesperson said in the statement. “Any allegation that ICE does not allow detainees to contact legal assistance is FALSE. All detainees have access to phones to communicate with lawyers.”

The statement did not address questions about whether ICE acknowledges the existence of a Maryland birth certificate for Diaz Morales, or whether ICE believes Dulce Consuelo Madrigal Diaz is the same person as Dulce Consuelo Diaz Morales; it also did not respond directly to the general claim that it is holding a U.S. citizen, while specifically denying that she is a citizen.

Incomplete information delays court order

Diaz Morales’ attorney on Dec. 16 filed a petition with the U.S. District Court of Maryland demanding the government prove her detainment is lawful. This is a right, called habeas corpus, guaranteed in Article I of the U.S. Constitution.

There has been a standing order since May in federal courts in Maryland on habeas corpus petitions designed to preserve the court’s ability to hear the cases. It interrupts the government’s authority to deport the person from the United States and also pauses the effects of any change in the detainee’s status that prevents the court from having jurisdiction, such as being moved out of state.

That order by Chief Judge George Russell — which attracted a June lawsuit from the Department of Homeland Security against all of Maryland’s judges — is supposed to go into effect for two days when petitioners’ filings clear specific administrative conditions.

However, federal court documents show the court clerk found the initial filing deficient.

“The Petition does not contain Petitioner’s full name, A# [an identifying number] and/or the certification required,” a Dec. 17 note from the court clerk reads, adding that the standing order wouldn’t go into effect until that information would be provided.

Court records show Diaz Morales’ attorney filed supplemental information with the court the same day, and the clerk noted that the order went into effect at 12:17 p.m. that day.

But by that afternoon, Slatton had posted a video to TikTok expressing frustration and anger that her client had been moved. She posted the video around 3 p.m. that day, according to TikTok data.

“I currently have a client who is a U.S. citizen who is in ICE custody,” Slatton said in the video. “She was taken yesterday, under very suspicious circumstances, in my opinion. And we have been desperately trying to get her out. We filed habeas last night. That was supposed to protect her from being moved and keep her in the jurisdiction.”

“Despite ICE having her birth certificate that shows that she was very clearly born in Maryland, they did move her to Louisiana. That is not a good sign. That is usually a last stop before deportation,” Slatton said in the video.

Though Slatton initially said on TikTok that Diaz Morales had been relocated despite the injunction prohibiting ICE from moving her, on Dec. 18 she clarified that her client had been moved out of Maryland before the order preventing her removal had gone into effect.

The Business Monthly attempted to contact Slatton by phone at her Silver Spring office Dec. 19, but was told she was not in the office.

Judge Brendan Hurson on Dec. 18 extended the order prohibiting Diaz Morales’ status change and deportation while the matter is in the court. On Dec. 22, Diaz Morales’ attorneys asked for an extension on filing for habeas corpus, and the judge gave them until Jan. 5 to file an amended petition. The government has until Jan. 19 to respond.

The Department of Homeland Security’s suit against Maryland’s judges was dismissed in August. It is now ongoing in a federal appellate court.

This is a reprint from The Business Monthly. Read more at https://bizmonthly.com/.

About this article

In addition to OutLook by the Bay, I am also the publisher of The Business Monthly, a newspaper that covers business, government and community news in Howard and Anne Arundel counties, plus Laurel, in continuous publication since 1993. I wrote about this because it happened here in Maryland.

Central to this story is the concept of due process, one of the rights that America’s founders thought was so important that they listed the Crown’s violations of due process as grievances in our Declaration of Independence, and put it into the Bill of Rights (and later, the 14th Amendment). Due Process is the idea that the government can’t take someone’s property or rights or life without a fair and legal reason for doing so.

The Declaration spells out why the founders were ready to separate: “For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury” and “For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences” are among the grievances expressed as facts “to a candid world.”

It would make sense, then, that as Americans we should value due process as a fundamental part of the American experience. Usually, it’s a judge or an appellate court who determines whether someone received due process.

The question that is interesting to ponder (and you’ll note, I’ve followed the facts here) is that the federal government has said Diaz Morales is getting due process. Her attorneys are saying that she is an American and shouldn’t be held. 

If her American citizenship is false and her receiving due process is true: Perhaps the claim of citizenship is erroneous, or worse, dishonest.

If her claim of American citizenship is true and her receiving due process is false: this is a violation of her right to due process, but it also raises the question of why a federal agency tasked with enforcing immigration would move someone so quickly after attorneys said they intend to prove their client’s citizenship. What does that mean for what we can expect from government?

If both are true — If she can be American, but also be detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and moved around in a way that upholds her right to due process — what does that mean about due process? What does that mean for me and my family? What does it mean for people I love? What does it mean for people I don’t know, people who don’t look like me?

It’s an interesting thought exercise. As an American who was raised on the idea of our Revolution being just, I am for due process. Pondering what due process actually looks like in this case is a way to go beyond just what I was told in school, to see how it works in practice in especially tough situations.