«I don’t think Trump will quickly back away from tightening the screws on migrants. But adjustments are possible.»

- What is happening now with Russian activist Vladislav Krasnov, who was arrested during a routine visit to immigration police on February 12? How dangerous is his situation?

- This detention was, on one hand, predictable: his immigration case has been suspended. On the other hand, it was not guaranteed, because the decision is left to the discretion of ICE officers reviewing his case. Previously, when Vladislav went to check in with ICE, he was not detained, but this time they decided otherwise. Now he faces deportation. ICE has already notified Vlad that deportation will take place soon. He told me this when he called from detention.

The situation is serious, but not yet irreversible. Vladislav’s ability to mount a proper defense was undermined: one of his former lawyers lost their license due to mistakes in his case. And the current threat of deportation is not a substantive decision on his case, but a judge’s reaction to those legal errors. It’s unfair.

Now Vlad’s new immigration attorney in California, Wally Mason, is working on reopening his case. According to the latest information she received, Vlad is being told that deportation is being prepared within a week. But we hope that legal petitions will stop this process.

At the same time, we will work with all the authorities—just as we did before the last deportation flight. Then, at the end of January, we managed to stop the deportation of nine Russians who had already been taken to a transit airport and were about to be deported. The involvement of the diaspora, public organizations, and members of Congress helps.

- Vlad has already spent over a year in detention under harsh conditions. How is he feeling now, after being arrested again and placed in immigration jail?

- The lawyer who sees him says he is in good health. But from my conversations with him, it’s clear that he’s anxious. Especially when messages come from ICE officers: that his information has been passed to the Russian consulate and that deportation is being prepared.

- How did you manage to stop the deportation of the Russians in January? Tell us how it happened and what has become of them.

- They were held for several days in a temporary facility not designed for so many people. At that time, there was a severe cold snap in the US, and conditions were harsh: on the fourth or fifth day, they called us in tears. There was no shower, and they had to sleep on the floor.

They were given food in paper bags. They tore the bags and laid the paper on the floor, so there would be at least some layer between their bodies and the floor—not so much for softness, but to keep from freezing as much.

On the day of deportation, people were taken out in the morning and seated on the plane. Then there was an additional check: ICE officers went through the Russian names on the list again, picked several people up from their seats, and told them to leave the plane. They were returned to the airport’s pre-detention center, and the next night transferred to another detention center in Arizona. They spent a week there.

One woman was left there: there was suspicion of an infectious disease, so she was isolated. The rest were sent back to the detention centers from which they had come. Many women were brought from a detention center in southern Louisiana—one of the largest women’s immigration prisons in the country; there were many Russian women there, and quite a few still remain.

- You mentioned that a new deportation flight is being prepared. Is it known when it might happen? What are the chances that Vlad will not be on it?

- We are worried about this too. So far, there is only preliminary information, and it is too unverified to speak definitively. There’s a peculiarity in detention centers: there are a lot of rumors. Usually, confirmation comes when detainees start being transferred from one detention center to a transit facility, then to another. Right now, we don’t see information that directly confirms such transfers, so we remain somewhat uncertain.

There was information that the next flight could be at the end of February. How likely is it that Vlad could be put on this flight? I hope not very likely. But I have to add: lately, many things have happened that didn’t happen before.

To prepare a deportation in such a short time, they would have to try very hard. On one hand, it seems doubtful. On the other, if they really try, quickly gather documents and get confirmations, including from the consulate, it cannot be ruled out. So we have to be ready for this.

- Is there a chance that people can stay in a third country during the deportation process?

- Theoretically, yes, if people are deported on commercial flights—that is, when Russians are bought tickets on regular flights. We’ve had such cases: people came to us at the final stages of the process, after denial, when they were deported on commercial flights. In some cases, people managed to persuade escorting officers: let me buy a ticket with a layover in another country—say, Turkey, Armenia, Thailand—and not fly to Russia. There have been successful cases where officers agreed, and the person changed their destination country.

But on charter deportations, this possibility is almost nonexistent. On such flights, dozens of people are brought onto a deportation plane. We see that these deportations go through Egypt. And it’s almost impossible there to talk to escorting officers to change the destination country or buy a ticket.

It’s important to understand that on such flights, not only Russians are deported: there’s a large group of people, including Iranians and citizens of Arabic-speaking countries. They are treated as one big group, and there is almost no opportunity to individually assess someone’s risks.

- And have the latest deportations followed this scheme? Does that mean it’s more cost-effective for ICE? Is it cheaper for them?

- Yes, exactly. This innovation arose during Trump’s second term: instead of buying individual tickets, they chartered large planes—“Boeings”—for 200 or more people and deported people in groups.

Why do flights with Russians go through Egypt? I assume it’s because from there the plane continues to the Middle East, usually toward Kuwait. In Egypt, the Russians are taken off and transferred to a smaller plane that flies to Moscow, Domodedovo.

The rest—the Iranians and others—are taken further on the same plane from the US to the next transit point, where they are apparently also transferred to smaller aircraft. The overall goal is to save the budget: this way deportations are cheaper.

- Do we know which airlines provide these services?

- Yes. We published this information. The December and January deportations were handled by the charter company Omni Air International. They work with ICE—not exclusively, but they have a government contract for such services.

Publishing information about deportation flights has an important humanitarian purpose. Very often, relatives don’t know when a person will be deported. People are brought to Moscow, but there’s no advance information: phones are off, SIM cards have long been blocked for non-payment. It’s hard for families to organize a meeting logistically. Such publications resonate with families: at least they can come to the airport and meet their loved ones.

We tracked Omni flights: in August, it was a departure from Alexandria Airport (Louisiana), in December—from Phoenix Airport, and in January—from Mesa Airport, also in Arizona.

- I can only assume that among the Iranian deportees there are surely people in similar situations as Russian anti-war activists.

- Yes. We have seen large actions by Iranian diasporas across the US in support of protests in Iran, unfortunately, harshly suppressed. They are also worried about ICE deportations: there is a risk for dissidents, including LGBT community members in Iran. They do much the same work: trying to protect people for whom returning is dangerous.

- Are detention centers also run by private companies?

- Yes, almost all are run by private companies. There are several major players, each managing several detention centers—about 10-15 in different regions of the US. The government contracts with these contractors for the operation and maintenance of immigration prisons. At the same time, government employees are present: ICE officers and other staff can come to these facilities, and in large detention centers ICE often has an on-site office—interaction between contractors and government officials happens constantly.

- What explains the terrible conditions in these detention centers? Is it private companies trying to minimize costs?

- The contract requires certain standards. But in reality, compliance varies greatly by state. Practices in California, Washington, or Arizona and in Louisiana, Mississippi, or Georgia are at different levels, even though formally the standards are the same nationwide. Regional differences within the US have a noticeable impact on detention centers, immigration courts, and much more.

In general, immigration prisons are intended for temporary, short-term detention: people are placed there who crossed the border without a visa, violated stay rules, or were arrested inside the US for deportation—to their country of citizenship or a country designated by the court. For Russians, mass problems in detention centers began in 2024 under the Biden administration. Then the southern border was opened wider, and people were allowed to request asylum at the border. This created a flow through Latin America and Mexico. But in May-June 2024, the Biden administration decided not to let Russians and citizens of several other post-Soviet countries into the US: to stop them at the border and place them in immigration jails—almost everyone, with rare exceptions.

This put serious pressure on the system.

In some detention centers, Russians began to make up 50-60-70% of detainees. While overall, Russians are 1-1.5% of migrants, and the main group is Latin American immigrants and people from other countries.

As an organization, we had not dealt with immigration issues systematically before: it seemed the system was working more or less normally. But after the 2024 decision, we began to deal with it constantly. And in 2025, with a sharp change in policy under Trump, the situation became even more acute: raids and arrests of people at large intensified—including truck drivers and those coming for routine visits to ICE offices, like Vlad Krasnov.

Many of those allowed through the border under Biden were required to check in with ICE. The Trump administration began detaining people right at those check-ins and sending them to detention centers.

- What exactly did RADR do to prevent the nine people from being deported on the flight?

- I would highlight two components.

First—the general, public one. After the killing of Americans in Minneapolis by ICE officers, attention to ICE became extremely high: from Congress, the press, and the public. ICE found itself under increased public scrutiny.

Second—our work, which we have been building for a year and a half. It consists of several parts: targeted work on each case, finding legal help and working with lawyers, communicating with the refugees themselves, and working with US authorities and foreign policy structures.

When we learned that one of our wards was to be put on a charter flight, we understood: a charter sharply reduces the possibility of changing the destination country. In Cairo, Egypt, it is almost impossible to prevent someone from ending up in Russia. Unlike commercial deportations, where sometimes it is possible to negotiate: “It’s dangerous for us to fly to Russia, let us buy tickets to another country.”

We used all the mechanisms we had developed. This person’s friend filed a petition in Arizona district court. We involved two members of Congress and their offices: Senator Mark Kelly (Arizona) and the Congressman from the Phoenix district, where the departure airport is located. They got involved very actively, and we are grateful to them. Both are Democrats, but Democrats often say directly: we need allies among Republicans, otherwise many initiatives won’t pass. This matches our experience: decisions on Russia and real humanitarian issues usually require bipartisan support.

The third component is the judicial authorities. We appealed to and worked with the courts. We knew that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) had two appeals from our client under review. We sought communication regarding these petitions, and eventually BIA communicated on our request—on behalf of the refugee—with ICE, asking not to deport until the appeals were considered.

- In January in Minneapolis, during ICE raids against migrants, officers killed US citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretty. This caused a huge national outcry. Is there any hope that after all that happened, ICE will be reined in, have its powers curtailed? What is the situation in Congress—does it have any levers of influence?

- Congress certainly has levers. The legislative branch sets the rules of the game—the laws—and exercises oversight over their implementation. The executive branch always seeks more room for action, Congress for more control. This is a normal dynamic.

In addition, Congress passes the budget. Right now, there are discussions: the annual budget hasn’t been passed, a temporary one was adopted to buy time for negotiations—who gets more funding, who gets less.

Events like those in Minneapolis don’t help ICE’s image. Even Republicans who might support expanding ICE’s budget may reconsider. Democrats—even more so. Real events affect the negotiation process. But so far, I don’t see the Trump administration’s political line on immigration changing.

ICE acts this way because there is an order from above. Yes, there are excesses on the ground. I don’t think the shooting of civilians was coordinated from the top, but the question is whether these excesses can change the overall course.

[The particularly brutal head of the US Border Patrol] Gregory Bovino was removed from the operation in Minneapolis—he didn’t resign, but he was removed from the city. This shows that the administration responds to pressure from Congress, the media, and civil society. Most likely, there will be an investigation, and removing those responsible is a logical step. What happens next depends on the dynamics: will they take “minimally sufficient” steps, or will public pressure continue and require new decisions? That’s how democracy works: nothing happens automatically, it’s a living process.

- Suppose Congress cuts ICE’s budget. What would that mean for Russians sitting in detention? Could they just, for budget reasons, deport everyone at once without any hearings?

- I don’t expect that. To deport people “all at once” without procedures would require serious changes to the rules—and they would affect not just Russians, but all migrants.

Within the asylum system, I don’t see the process being conceptually abolished. If a person is admitted to the judicial system, they can’t be deported at ICE’s whim: deportation is only possible after a deportation order from an immigration judge takes effect.

Under Trump and Biden, changes mainly involved speeding up the process for people in detention. In detention, court cases move faster: people at liberty have hearings scheduled for 2027-2029, while in detention it’s within months: 2-3 months, several hearings, then an individual hearing and final decision.

ICE can’t just deport everyone who has petitions pending. But mistakes happen. That’s why we work with the authorities, draw attention to violations, and push for compliance with the rules.

If the budget is cut, ICE will have to prioritize operations, redistribute resources, and possibly send people on unpaid leave. Activity will likely decrease.

There’s another effect: to save money, they may release people from detention more often. We saw such an example: refugees from a family detention center in Texas—mothers, fathers, children—were unexpectedly released after several months. This is good news for people, and it shows that ICE’s priorities can change under resource pressure.

- When people talk about Trump’s immigration policy, they usually mention his voters. Mass arrests of migrants in the streets and in their homes are a very simple and effective way to appeal to voters, to show the president is keeping his campaign promises. But do these voters like it when ICE kills American citizens in broad daylight?

- Obviously, such stories don’t help the administration. At the same time, among Trump supporters, there’s another reaction—visible in social media comments: that people shouldn’t have protested with weapons, shouldn’t have interfered with federal agents. That view exists too.

But overall, Trump’s message was aimed at migrants, not Americans. Now we see violence against US citizens. This is not the target group for the harsh immigration campaign. And that creates a challenge for the administration: how to maintain the political line of “protecting the borders” without looking like a government attacking its own citizens.

I think they will take some steps—we’re already seeing some decisions. Whether that will be enough depends on whether public and political pressure continues. Tightening the screws on immigration law is one of the key lines of Trump’s second presidency. I don’t think he’ll give it up quickly, though tactical changes and adjustments are possible.