An immigration judge ordered the removal of Rafael Andres Rubio Bohorquez, a 53-year-old Venezuelan national and New York City Council employee, from the United States. City Council Speaker Julie Menin announced the ruling on Wednesday, calling it a "miscarriage of justice" and pledging to file an appeal.

DHS Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis confirmed the order in a statement:

"Today, an immigration judge ordered Rafael Andres Rubio Bohorquez, a criminal illegal alien from Venezuela and an employee of New York's City Council, a final order of removal."

Bis added that ICE intends to act swiftly:

"His criminal history includes an arrest for assault. This ruling is a victory for the rule of law. ICE will work as quickly as possible to return this criminal to his home country."

New York's political class responded with predictable fury. As reported by Fox News, Mayor Zohran Mamdani called the ruling "an affront to justice." Menin demanded Rubio Bohorquez's release pending appeal. The deadline for that appeal is April 17.

The facts New York officials don't want to lead with

According to DHS, Rubio Bohorquez entered the United States in 2017 on a B2 tourist visa, which required him to depart that same year. He didn't. Federal officials say he overstayed, had no work authorization, and was employed by the NYC Council as a data analyst for roughly one year. He also has an arrest for assault on his record.

That's the baseline: a foreign national who entered legally, stayed illegally, worked without authorization on a city government payroll, and has a criminal history. An immigration judge reviewed the case and ordered removal.

Yet listen to how Mamdani framed it on X:

"A dedicated public servant with legal authorization to remain in the country, Rafael showed up for a routine immigration appointment and, despite following the rules, he was detained and has now been held for months."

"Following the rules" is doing extraordinary work in that sentence. The man overstayed a tourist visa by roughly eight years. DHS says he lacked work authorization. An immigration judge found grounds for removal. The characterization of someone who overstayed a visa by nearly a decade as simply "following the rules" tells you everything about how New York's leadership views immigration law: as an obstacle to navigate around, not a framework to respect.

The 'technical error' defense

Menin attempted to reframe the entire deportation order as a clerical mishap:

"Today's ruling appears to hinge on a procedural issue related to his asylum application."

"That is extremely troubling. A technical error should not determine the fate of a man who has done everything right and poses no risk to anyone."

According to reporting from the New York Post, citing Menin, Rubio Bohorquez's lawyer said a missing signature issue could be rectified in one hour. Menin also claimed he had been "cleared to remain" in the country until October 2026.

These claims may or may not hold up on appeal. But notice the rhetorical move: the deportation order issued by a judge becomes a mere "technical error," and eight years of overstaying a tourist visa becomes "done everything right." Menin is not arguing the law. She's arguing that the law shouldn't apply.

She then escalated further:

"Let me be clear: Rafael should not continue to be detained while this is sorted out. An appeal will be filed, and we demand that Rafael's case be properly heard by the deadline on April 17. At a minimum, he should be released pending that appeal. There is no justification for continuing to hold him under these circumstances."

"No justification" for detaining someone with a final removal order, an assault arrest, and years of unlawful presence. That's not a legal argument. That's a declaration that immigration enforcement itself is illegitimate.

New York's real immigration policy

This case is a clean window into how deep the sanctuary mentality runs in New York City government. An illegal immigrant with an assault arrest was not only living freely in the city; he was on the city payroll. Federal officials say he had no work authorization. The City Council apparently either didn't check or didn't care.

When ICE detained him two months ago during an immigration appointment, city leaders didn't pause to ask how an illegal immigrant ended up employed by the municipal legislature. They didn't ask why the Council's hiring processes failed to flag his status. They went straight to outrage.

This is the pattern:

• An illegal immigrant is identified and detained through lawful process.
• City officials immediately cast the individual as a victim.
• The enforcement action is framed as unjust regardless of the underlying facts.
• No accountability is directed at the local failures that created the situation.

Menin isn't asking how a man without work authorization ended up as a city data analyst. Mamdani isn't asking why the Council's employment verification missed this. The entire political apparatus is pointed at the federal government for enforcing the law, while the city's own role in the mess goes unexamined.

Who the law is for

An immigration judge reviewed this case and issued a final order of removal. That's the system working. It's the same system that processes asylum claims, grants visas, and extends protections to those who qualify. You cannot champion immigration courts when they rule in your favor and declare them an "affront to justice" when they don't.

Rubio Bohorquez will have his appeal. The April 17 deadline gives his attorneys a clear window. Due process hasn't been denied. It's been followed.

What New York's leaders actually object to isn't a procedural failing. It's the existence of consequences.