Orlando judge suspects foul play by ICE agents, orders 2 Venezuelans freed

Federal judge says warrants for detentions were invalid, raising concerns about ICE practices

Published on Feb. 13, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge in Orlando ordered two Venezuelan migrants released from ICE custody, saying he suspected foul play by the agents involved in their detentions. The judge found the warrants ordering their arrests were invalid, with one signed hours after the person was already detained. The judge also raised concerns about inconsistencies in the paperwork, saying "there are only two explanations for this - and neither of them are good."

Why it matters

The release of the two immigrants is part of a national trend where federal judges across the country have rejected the Trump administration's efforts to detain everyone facing deportation, arguing it violates longstanding legal practice. This case highlights growing concerns about potential misconduct and due process violations by ICE agents in their treatment of immigrants.

The details

In one case, U.S. District Judge John Antoon said the warrant ordering Junier Silva-Parucho's arrest on Jan. 29 was signed three hours after he was taken into custody, making it invalid. In the other case, Antoon ordered Fadya Contreras de Rondon released because while her arrest warrant and notice to appear in court bore the name of the same agent, they had different signatures, indicating potential irregularities.

  • On January 29, Silva-Parucho was arrested by ICE agents.
  • Three hours after Silva-Parucho's arrest, the warrant for his arrest was signed.
  • On January 9, Contreras de Rondon was arrested by U.S. Customs and Border Patrol along with her husband.

The players

Judge John Antoon

A federal judge in Orlando who ordered the release of the two Venezuelan migrants, saying he suspected foul play by the ICE agents involved in their detentions.

Junier Silva-Parucho

A Venezuelan construction worker with a pending asylum application and valid employment authorization, who was ordered released by Judge Antoon.

Fadya Contreras de Rondon

A Venezuelan immigrant who was arrested along with her husband while driving on Interstate-75, and was ordered released by Judge Antoon due to irregularities in her arrest warrant.

Jeremy Bloor

An Assistant U.S. Attorney who represented the government in the hearings before Judge Antoon.

Phillip Arroyo

A local attorney who has gotten 17 clients freed by filing habeas corpus petitions in federal court, representing the two Venezuelans released by Judge Antoon.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“If the court considers it an invalid warrant, I can concede that … we would no longer defend it.”

— Jeremy Bloor, Assistant U.S. Attorney

“I find that the detention was illegal based on the sequence of events.”

— Judge John Antoon

“You represent the United States, this is a serious matter. I can't find that any of these are signed validly because these have been signed differently. I don't know what's going on with immigration personnel. There are only two explanations for this - and neither of them are good.”

— Judge John Antoon

“We told them we are Venezuelan, and that was enough for them to detain us even though we had valid documents. What we suffered is very easy to say but very difficult to have lived.”

— Fadya Contreras de Rondon

“They treated us badly. They made us feel like we were garbage.”

— Fadya Contreras de Rondon

What’s next

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of the government's position on detaining migrants, though that ruling does not impact migrants released in Florida. A similar case is being heard in the 11th Circuit, which would cover Florida and most of the southeast.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns about potential misconduct and due process violations by ICE agents in their treatment of immigrants, as federal judges across the country have increasingly rejected the government's efforts to detain everyone facing deportation, arguing it violates longstanding legal practice.