Paramjit Singh, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, is behind bars in Northern Kentucky at the Kenton County Detention Center. His eyesight is deteriorating due to a brain tumor while the U.S. Department of Homeland Security tries to kick him out of the country.
Singh moved to America from India decades ago. A former journalist for Louisville Public Media, Divya Karthikeyan, reported on the federal government’s case against Singh for The Intercept, a national publication.
As part of their case, federal authorities have claimed he has a past conviction for forgery. But Karthikeyan’s reporting found a lack of evidence for that.
I talked with her about the latest details of the case. Here’s our conversation.
This transcript is edited for length and clarity.
Morgan Watkins: Divya, welcome back to the LPM studio.
Divya Karthikeyan: Thank you for having me. It's nice to be back.
WATKINS: So let's talk about your new article published by the Intercept. You dug into a situation where the federal government is trying to deport an Indiana businessman currently locked up in a Kentucky jail. What stands out about this case?
KARTHIKEYAN: When I first heard about it, when I got a tip [from a source], the fact that he was detained in ICE custody for two months with a returning brain tumor, losing vision and severe heart conditions … [that] was what stood out. And then: What was the government's argument here? Because he also has a green card.
WATKINS: He’s a pretty well-known businessman where he lives in Fort Wayne, right?
KARTHIKEYAN: He is, yes. He owns about 16 gas stations. He owns a trucking company. Employs 200 to 300 people. There were a lot of people who came in support of him.
WATKINS: Singh was eligible to post bond, but is being held in custody anyway. And that represents a shift in policy from federal officials. Is that right?
KARTHIKEYAN: What the government used as a mechanism – which they have begun using increasingly and which many immigration judges have considered unconstitutional [and has] barely been used since the 2000s – is called an automatic stay.
$10,000 bond – [Singh’s] family was ready to post that bond. However, government lawyers appeal the bond and basically say the immigration judge erred in his judgment, and they hadn't considered a 2008 criminal forgery conviction in Illinois.
WATKINS: You also reported on an apparent lack of evidence to back up the federal authorities’ argument for why Singh should be kept in custody and ultimately deported. Tell me about that.
KARTHIKEYAN: The family's argument is that he was never in Illinois. I looked at records independently [and] did not find any conviction there. There were private investigators that the family had hired. They found no evidence of a criminal conviction, as per the Illinois State Police's record.
WATKINS: So what happens next for Singh?
KARTHIKEYAN: This Monday, we had a preliminary removal proceeding that led to a contested hearing. The government lawyers here have to provide substantiating information for the claim they are making that he has a criminal conviction of forgery. His [Singh’s] lawyers are basically trying to make the case that he had not committed a crime of moral turpitude and what the government lawyers are saying has no standing. If they succeed, Paramjit Singh will not be deported, and he will remain in this country.
WATKINS: This all started for Singh when he was coming back into the states from a trip to India, but he wasn't expecting to have any issues with that.
KARTHIKEYAN: He had traveled to and fro from India, Canada, Mexico. Never had a problem. He did have a felony theft conviction from back in 2000 where he served time. That was something that he was able to explain, in case that was brought up.
He was warned by his family, according to his niece, not to go to India right now. And he said, ‘You know, I'm not the kind of person that would be detained.’
I think this really shatters the quote-unquote “perfect life” that a model minority has to conform to, of: If you contribute to society, if you make money, if you become successful in America, or have a green card [or] citizenship, it would make you immune to interactions with the state where you will be seen in negative light and negative intent.
And in this case, even when you have the resources – even when he did everything “right,” quote-unquote – that you could get caught in the system is very telling of how deportation laws have been weaponized and how much of a shift we are seeing in this country when it comes to how immigrants are treated regardless of their legal status.
