Note from the Editors: This article was written by one of the five fellows who participated in the 2025 Pluma Libre Journalism Fellowship. This year’s fellowship focused on developing stories and projects about local immigration and social issues.
In immigration detention, individuals are not only locked away from their communities but from meaning itself. They receive documents titled “Notice to Appear,” are told they are in “removal proceedings,” and may undergo something called a “credible fear interview.”
These terms may sound technical or neutral. But for someone locked in a concrete cell, denied a lawyer, separated from their children, or uncertain of their fate, they are anything but.
Simply put, understanding the language of immigration detention isn’t a matter of translation; it’s about power. Legal language, especially in the immigration system, functions as a wall built not of concrete or barbed wire, but of jargon and exclusion.
A Brief History of the Hidden Violence of Legal Language
Legal language is often portrayed as objective and precise. After all, it is supposed to be the vocabulary of justice and order. But in practice, this language serves as a gatekeeping mechanism, excluding those without formal education, English fluency, or access to legal representation. For low-income communities of color like our own, the law’s technical terms are not just confusing; they are weapons.
Time and time again, we have witnessed this facade of neutrality, objectivity, and precision weaponized as a means of controlling our access to rights. With each time, this facade becomes something we have come to know as insidiously American.
During the post-Reconstruction era, Southern states employed complex legal codes and literacy tests not only to disenfranchise Black voters, but to obscure the very rights they were being denied. We witnessed it again in the late 19th and early 20th centuries with the imposition of English-language literacy tests and moral character requirements that targeted Chinese, Mexican, and Southern European migrants.
Legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw notes that the formality of legal language often conceals systemic violence. Legal terms present themselves as impartial, but they often reproduce and obscure racial harm. We witnessed it now in the language of immigration detention, in terms like “expedited removal,” “apprehension,” and “detention” that appear procedural, but mask the realities of incarceration, family separation, and deportation without due process.
Every time, these arbitrary codes, tests, and requirements odiously twinkle with the promise of the American Dream, only for them to really be ways of embedding white supremacy, exclusionary policies, and mass incarceration into the framework of legal prose.
Throwing The Book at Legal Language
In detention, legal terminology becomes its own kind of cage. The word “detention” implies temporary hold, but for many, it means indefinite imprisonment. “Removal” sounds procedural, but it refers to the forced ejection of someone from their home, job, and family. “Voluntary departure” may suggest freedom, yet it often occurs under coercion and without informed consent. People are pressured to sign deportation orders in languages they do not read. Some never see a lawyer. Others have no idea how long they’ll be held, or why.
In detention, words often reduce stories of pain and resistance into paperwork. A mother being deported without seeing her child becomes an administrative matter. A hunger striker in solitary confinement becomes a disciplinary case. And yet, the language insists: “This is legal. This is orderly. This is not violence.”
These terms shape not just how cases are processed but how people inside are treated. When legal language fails to describe the full reality of detention, it enables the system to deny what it is: punishment without charge, incarceration without end, control without accountability.
Rewriting the term, Redefining the System
While I have so far only shared how language has been weaponized, we cannot forget that language is one of our most powerful tools of repair.
Sure, like writing, the law can construct reality. However, like writing, the law can also be rewritten. The law can be rewritten for the community by the community in words that we can hear, hold, and understand.
To define legal terms clearly, in plain language and/or in multiple languages, is not just an educational act. It is a political one. Reclaiming language, demystifying it, and making it accessible becomes a form of resistance.
During the most recent immigration climate, we have witnessed and participated in this form of resistance in the distribution of bilingual red cards, in hosting and attending community workshops, and in the posts and reposts of bilingual Instagram infographics.
A Glossary With Stakes
I met with Immigration Paralegal, Bruno Rosales. Since our interview, Rosales has held a free Immigration Teach-In at Ante Books, where he covered some of the most common and misunderstood questions about immigration.
For this article, Rosales helped define a few key terms in the context of immigration detention:
Apprehension
“Apprehension is when ICE makes contact and takes someone into custody. It’s the moment ICE gains power over someone.”
Detention/Detained
“Detention means ICE has taken you into custody. Some people think being arrested for something like DWI means they’re detained, but that’s local law enforcement. Once ICE picks you up, you’re officially “detained” and in ICE custody.”
“One of the biggest misconceptions is that detention means automatic deportation. People think once ICE picks you up, it’s over, but that’s not true. Detention is just the beginning of a legal process, and there are often many options available.”
Deportation
“Deportation means the government is removing you from the country. But they don’t have unilateral authority. Either a judge signs a removal order, or the immigrant signs a voluntary departure agreement. Deportation isn’t automatic.”
Expedited Removal
“It’s a process for people who have been in the U.S. before and re-entered. It’s harsher than standard removal proceedings and offers fewer legal protections, like no eligibility for bond.”
Immigration Bond
“It’s different from a criminal bond. It’s about convincing the judge you’ll comply with your immigration process, showing strong community ties, family support, and a sponsor. It’s the main tool to stay in the U.S. while fighting your case.”
Removal Proceedings
“If it’s your first time in the U.S., you get put in removal proceedings. So, the government thinks that you’re here illegally, we’re opening this case to deport you to make that deportation happen.”
Redefining What Justice Looks Like
The hidden violence of legal language is not only exclusive to the times I have mentioned or immigration detention, but is interwoven in our everyday lives. While we still have a long way to go in resisting and changing the accessibility of legal language, demystifying these terms is the first step toward helping our community understand the ramifications.
“There’s a growing body of immigrant detention literature, and we need to examine detention the way we’ve examined prison abolition,” Rosales shared. Through community workshops, such as the one Rosales led, the community can learn and take an active role in changing legal terminology.
In Rosales’ words, “Once you see the law as a product of society (shaped by inequality), you realize it’s not set in stone. The law gets its power from us, and we can change it. We need to challenge dominant narratives and redefine what justice can look like.”
