A New York Times investigation has revealed allegations that political operative Paolo Zampolli contacted a senior ICE official to initiate deportation proceedings against his ex-partner, Amanda Ungaro, during their contested custody battle over their teenage son. The case, which The Daily Beast first reported in detail, raises critical questions about whether federal immigration enforcement can be leveraged as a weapon in New York family court proceedings.
| Key Facts | Details |
|---|---|
| What happened | A parent allegedly contacted a senior ICE official to trigger deportation of a co-parent during an active custody dispute |
| When | Ungaro was detained and deported in 2025; the story resurfaced in April 2026 |
| Where | New York family court system; federal immigration enforcement |
| Who is affected | Any non-citizen parent involved in a custody dispute in New York |
| Key statute | N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240 (best interests of the child standard) |
| Practical impact | Courts may need to scrutinize whether immigration referrals are made in bad faith to gain custody advantages |
New York Courts Decide Custody Based on the Child's Best Interests, Not a Parent's Immigration Status
Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1), New York courts determine custody based solely on the best interests of the child. A parent's immigration status is not a statutory factor in that analysis. The New York Court of Appeals reinforced this principle in its longstanding precedent that custody determinations must focus on factors like parental fitness, stability, and the child's emotional bonds, not on a parent's relationship with federal authorities.
The allegations in this case suggest a troubling pattern that family law attorneys across the country have flagged for years: one parent using immigration enforcement as a tactical weapon to remove the other parent from a custody proceeding entirely. If a parent is deported, they cannot appear in court, cannot exercise visitation, and face enormous logistical barriers to maintaining any parental relationship. According to the American Immigration Lawyers Association, an estimated 5.1 million U.S. citizen children have at least one undocumented parent, meaning millions of custody cases could be vulnerable to this kind of manipulation.
How New York Law Handles Immigration-Related Custody Tactics
New York family courts have several tools to prevent one parent from using immigration threats to gain an unfair custody advantage. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1)(a), judges must weigh each parent's willingness to foster a relationship between the child and the other parent. A parent who engineers the deportation of a co-parent would be demonstrating the opposite of that cooperative spirit, and New York judges can weigh that conduct heavily against them.
New York courts also have authority under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 75-j to communicate with courts in other jurisdictions and even other countries to ensure custody orders are enforced across borders. When a parent is removed from the United States, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), codified in N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law §§ 75 through 75-a, establishes that New York retains jurisdiction over custody if the child continues to reside in the state.
Federal law provides some additional protections. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) includes provisions for victims of domestic abuse to seek immigration relief independently of their abuser. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2), a parent facing removal can apply for cancellation of removal if deportation would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a U.S. citizen child. Immigration judges granted approximately 4,200 such cancellations in fiscal year 2024, according to the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
New York practitioners should also be aware that N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 241 allows courts to appoint a law guardian (attorney for the child) whose role is to independently advocate for the child's interests. In cases where one parent faces deportation, a law guardian can present evidence to the court that the child's relationship with both parents must be preserved regardless of immigration proceedings.
The Broader Pattern: Immigration as a Family Law Weapon
This case is not an isolated incident. A 2023 report from the National Immigrant Women's Advocacy Project at American University found that 48% of attorneys surveyed had represented clients whose abusive partners threatened to report them to immigration authorities during custody or divorce proceedings. The tactic is so well-documented that advocates have given it a name: immigration-related abuse.
In New York specifically, the Sanctuary City Executive Order (Executive Order 41, updated in 2014) limits city agencies from cooperating with ICE detainers absent a judicial warrant. However, this protection does not extend to direct private complaints made by individuals to federal immigration authorities. Nothing in current law prevents a private citizen from contacting ICE about a co-parent's immigration status, even if the motive is to gain a custody advantage.
The gap between New York's protective policies and the reality of federal enforcement creates a legal gray zone. Family law attorneys in New York are increasingly advising non-citizen clients to consult with an immigration attorney simultaneously with their custody lawyer, a dual-representation strategy that was once uncommon but has become essential in the post-2024 enforcement environment. ICE arrests increased 143% from January to June 2025 compared to the same period in 2024, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University.
Practical Takeaways for New York Parents
-
A parent's immigration status does not determine custody outcomes in New York. Courts apply the best-interests-of-the-child standard under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240, which focuses on parenting ability, stability, and the child's emotional needs.
-
If you are a non-citizen parent in a custody dispute, consult both a family law attorney and an immigration attorney immediately. Dual representation is critical because actions in one proceeding can directly affect the other.
-
Document any threats from a co-parent to report you to immigration authorities. New York courts can consider this conduct as evidence of bad faith under the willingness-to-foster-relationship factor, which often weighs heavily in custody determinations.
-
If a parent has been deported, New York retains custody jurisdiction as long as the child remains in the state under the UCCJEA (N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 75-a). A deported parent can still participate in proceedings through video conferencing and appointed counsel.
-
Parents who believe a co-parent has weaponized immigration enforcement should file a motion in family court requesting that the judge consider the co-parent's conduct as a factor in the custody determination. Courts have broad discretion to weigh one parent's deliberate interference with the other parent's ability to maintain a relationship with the child.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a parent's immigration status be used against them in a New York custody case?
No. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240, New York courts decide custody based on the best interests of the child, not a parent's immigration status. Judges evaluate factors like parental fitness, stability, and the parent-child bond. A parent's visa status or undocumented status alone is not a basis for denying custody or visitation.
What happens to a custody case if one parent is deported from the United States?
New York retains jurisdiction over the custody case under the UCCJEA (N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law §§ 75-75-a) as long as the child continues to live in the state. The deported parent can participate remotely via video and retain legal representation. Approximately 4,200 parents annually receive cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2) based on hardship to U.S. citizen children.
Is it illegal to report a co-parent to ICE during a custody dispute?
No federal or New York state law explicitly prohibits a private individual from reporting someone to ICE, even during a custody dispute. However, New York family courts can treat this conduct as evidence of bad faith and unwillingness to foster the child's relationship with the other parent, a factor that can significantly influence custody outcomes under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1)(a).
Can a deported parent still get custody or visitation rights in New York?
Yes. Deportation does not terminate parental rights in New York. Courts can order visitation through video calls, summer visits in the parent's home country, or other arrangements that serve the child's best interests. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240, the court must consider the quality of each parent's relationship with the child regardless of geographic location.
What legal protections exist for immigrant parents in domestic violence situations?
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) allows immigrant victims of domestic abuse to self-petition for legal status under 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A), independent of their abuser. Applicants can file confidentially, and DHS processed approximately 11,500 VAWA self-petitions in fiscal year 2024. New York also offers U-visa certifications through local law enforcement for victims of qualifying crimes.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.