On April 14, 2026, The New York Times and Raw Story reported that Paolo Zampolli, a Trump presidential special envoy, allegedly contacted senior ICE official David Venturella to detain his Brazilian ex-girlfriend Amanda Ungaro during their contested New York custody dispute over their teenage son. Ungaro was handcuffed, held in immigration detention for months, and deported to Brazil — leaving the child in the United States with Zampolli. New York family courts treat coordinated immigration enforcement against a co-parent as misconduct directly relevant to custody under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240.
Key Facts
| Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| What happened | Trump envoy Paolo Zampolli allegedly asked ICE Acting Director David Venturella to detain his ex-girlfriend during a custody dispute |
| When reported | April 14, 2026 (per The New York Times and Raw Story) |
| Where | New York family court (custody venue); ICE detention transferred Ungaro to Louisiana facility |
| Who is affected | Amanda Ungaro (deported to Brazil), the couple's teenage son (remains in U.S.), and an estimated 11 million non-citizen co-parents nationwide |
| Key statutes | N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240 (best interests + domestic violence), N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 76-a (UCCJEA emergency jurisdiction) |
| Practical impact | Family lawyers nationwide are now advising non-citizen clients to retain immigration counsel as a defensive measure in custody litigation |
Why this matters legally
Using immigration enforcement to gain leverage in a custody case is family-law misconduct, not a neutral civil tip. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1)(a), New York courts must consider "all factors" relevant to the best interests of the child, and the statute specifically requires courts to weigh "the effect of such domestic violence upon the best interests of the child" when allegations are proven by a preponderance of the evidence. Reporting a co-parent to ICE for the purpose of removing them from the child's life is increasingly characterized by family-law scholars and practitioners as a form of coercive control — a recognized category of domestic violence under New York's expanded 2022 definition of "family offense" in N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 812.
The 2026 enforcement environment has changed the calculus dramatically. ICE removed roughly 271,000 people in fiscal year 2024 and has expanded interior enforcement operations under the second Trump administration, meaning that an immigration referral is no longer a low-probability threat — it is a near-certain pathway to detention for any non-citizen without lawful permanent status. New York judges are aware of this shift, and several appellate decisions in 2024 and 2025 have treated immigration-based intimidation as relevant evidence of bad faith parenting under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240.
How New York law handles this
New York applies a pure best-interests standard under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240, and there is no presumption favoring either parent based on citizenship status. The seminal case Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167 (1982), requires courts to consider the totality of the circumstances, including each parent's relative fitness, the quality of the home environment, and the parental guidance provided to the child. A parent who orchestrates the removal of the other parent from the country directly undermines the child's right to a continuing relationship with both parents — a factor New York courts have consistently identified as central to the best-interests analysis.
New York also adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) at N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 75 through § 78-a. Under § 76-a, New York retains exclusive continuing jurisdiction over a custody case once it has been properly filed, even if one parent is deported. A deported parent does not automatically lose custody rights — they retain standing to participate by video, to seek modification, and to enforce visitation through international mechanisms. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction governs cross-border return petitions, and Brazil is a signatory, which preserves Ungaro's procedural rights even from abroad.
New York courts can also issue orders of protection under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 842 restricting a parent from contacting immigration authorities about the other parent for the duration of the custody case. Several New York County family court judges issued such orders in 2025 after a wave of similar incidents documented by the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence.
Practical takeaways
If you are a non-citizen co-parent in New York or any U.S. jurisdiction, the Zampolli case underscores several defensive measures family lawyers are now recommending as standard practice:
-
Retain immigration counsel in parallel with your divorce attorney. Treat it as a single integrated defense — not two separate matters. Many New York firms now staff joint family-immigration teams for exactly this scenario.
-
Document your immigration status and any threats in writing. Save text messages, emails, voicemails, or social media posts in which the other parent references ICE, deportation, or your status. These become evidence of coercive control under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 812.
-
File for an order of protection under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 842 at the first sign of immigration-based threats. New York courts can prohibit a parent from contacting federal immigration authorities about the other parent during pending litigation.
-
Establish a written family preparedness plan naming a U.S.-citizen guardian and granting durable power of attorney for your children in the event you are detained. Without such a plan, a detained parent risks losing custody by default.
-
Request emergency or temporary custody orders early. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 76-c, New York courts can issue temporary emergency orders when a child is at risk, including risk created by one parent's removal of the other parent from the country.
-
If you are already detained, do not sign any document waiving custody, parental rights, or your right to participate in U.S. proceedings. Many ICE detention facilities present such waivers as routine paperwork.
Frequently asked questions
FAQs
Can a parent legally report their ex to ICE during a custody battle in New York?
Reporting an ex to ICE is not a crime, but New York courts treat it as evidence of bad-faith parenting under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240. Since 2024, several New York judges have shifted custody to the deported parent's designee or imposed protective orders restricting further immigration contact. The conduct can also support a family offense petition under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 812.
Does deportation automatically terminate parental rights in New York?
No. Deportation alone does not terminate parental rights in New York. Under N.Y. Soc. Serv. Law § 384-b, termination requires clear and convincing evidence of abandonment, neglect, or unfitness. A deported parent retains standing to participate in custody proceedings remotely and may seek modification under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240 at any time.
What is coercive control under New York family law?
Coercive control was added to New York's definition of "family offense" in 2022 under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 812. It includes a pattern of behavior used to dominate or intimidate a partner, such as financial isolation, surveillance, or threats — including immigration-based threats. A finding of coercive control supports orders of protection lasting up to 5 years and weighs heavily in custody determinations under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240.
Can New York courts keep custody jurisdiction if one parent is deported?
Yes. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 76-a, New York retains exclusive continuing jurisdiction over a custody case once it is properly filed, even if a parent is removed from the United States. The deported parent may participate by video, file motions, and enforce visitation under the Hague Convention. Brazil, where Ungaro was deported, is a Hague signatory.
Should non-citizen parents in New York hire an immigration attorney even without a pending case?
Yes. Family lawyers nationwide began advising non-citizen co-parents to retain immigration counsel as a standard defensive measure after the 2024 enforcement expansion. Joint representation costs $3,000 to $10,000 in initial fees but provides documented status preparation, family preparedness planning under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 76-c, and rapid response if detention occurs.
Get the right team in your corner
If you are a non-citizen parent navigating a New York custody case — or you are concerned that an ex may use immigration enforcement against you — finding a family-law attorney who collaborates with immigration counsel is critical. Browse vetted New York family-law attorneys in your county to start building your defense team.
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.