An affidavit included as part of a Monday legal filing submitted by Estefany Rodriguez Flores, the Colombian journalist arrested in Nashville, appears to claim that an attorney advised her to wait a “few weeks” after missing an appointment with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) due to Winter Storm Fern, despite the agency instructing her to contact the ICE Field Office if she could not attend.
Written by Alejandro Medina III, a citizen of the United States who married Rodriguez Flores on January 21, the document summarizes his recollection of the events surrounding his wife’s March 4 arrest and detention by ICE.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has claimed Rodriguez Flores failed to respond to two letters, which instructed her to appear at an ICE Field Office in Nashville, and the affidavit offers new details about the events after she missed the meeting set by the first letter. Sent on January 8, it instructed her to appear at the field office on January 26, when most of Nashville was shut down by Winter Storm Fern.
“From the moment that we received the first letter from ICE with an ICE interview date, we were preparing for her to go and possibly get arrested,” wrote Medina in the signed affidavit. “We hired the immigration attorney Joel Coxander for our sponsorship case and to help Estefany with the ICE interview.”
Medina added that Rodriguez Flores “never considered” skipping the interview prior to the storm, though Coxander previously stated that the G-56 letter, or Call-In-Letter, was an optional invitation for her to voluntarily appear.
After the storm effectively shut down Nashville, including the ICE Field Office where Rodriguez Flores was instructed to appear, Medina wrote that Coxander contacted the couple to inform them that the meeting was impossible.
“He said that when the ICE office gets closed, they usually reschedule and send a new letter, or tells [sic] everyone scheduled that day when to come,” wrote Medina. “Our plan was that if we didn’t get a new ICE letter from ICE after a few weeks, the attorney was going to contact ICE about the missed appointment and figure out what she needed to do.”
In apparent contradiction to the plan Medina said was crafted by the couple with input from their attorney, a publicly released sample G-56 letter from ICE instructs recipients to return the letter with a detailed explanation if they are unable to keep an appointment.
The document states, “It is important that you keep this appointment and bring this letter with you. If you are unable to do so, state your reason, sign below, and return this letter to this office at once.”
In another filing, Rodriguez Flores’ legal team has additionally submitted the Call-In Letter she received from ICE, which revealed the meeting was called for the purpose of issuing a Notice to Appear.
The G-56 letter additionally instructed Rodriguez Flores, “If you cannot make this appointment, please contact the Field Office at Nashville, TN,” and included a phone number.
In his affidavit, Medina also acknowledges that ICE sent a second letter, dated February 10, which instructed her to appear on February 25. He also acknowledged that he visited the ICE Field Office with another attorney, Caleb Mundy.
According to Rodriguez Flores’ filings, the ICE Field Office had no record of its meeting with Rodriguez Flores, and a new meeting date was assigned. Medina describes this process in the affidavit, claiming he and Mundy repeatedly asked ICE to confirm the meeting:
My trip to ICE with attorney Mundy was surprising. The ICE officer looked at the February 25 appointment letter and looked up Estefany in their system and said that she had no appointment in their system. He said that the January 26 appointment also wasn’t in their system. He spoke to another officer, then told us again that she was not in the system. After he reiterated that multiple times, we went outside and discussed it. In order to be totally sure about the February 25 appointment, we went back inside to talk to the officer again. Attorney Mundy asked the officer again if Estefany had to go to ICE on Wednesday and said that she would not miss the appointment if she had to go, so if she really did not have to go to ICE on Wednesday, we needed to be really sure. The officer responded that she did not have an appointment with ICE on Wednesday, February 25 and for her to instead come on March 17, 2026.”
In legal filings submitted by the DOJ, the DHS has claimed, by contrast, that Medina and Mundy did not show either the Call-In Letter to agents at the ICE Field Office, apparently leaving them unable to accurately provide information about Rodriguez Flores.
According to the DHS, Rodriguez Flores entered the United States on a tourism visa in 2021 and has illegally overstayed the visa since, despite submitting an asylum application and obtaining two work permits.
In addition to the new information about the G-56, Medina also wrote in the affidavit that the couple began planning their wedding last November and selected a wedding venue on December 7, 2025. This would indicate their plans predated the January 8 letter Rodriguez Flores received from ICE.
An immigration court on Monday granted Rodriguez Flores a $10,000 bond, but the decision was quickly appealed, meaning Rodriguez Flores will remain in custody for up to 90 days while the Board of Immigration Appeals contemplates its decision.
– – –
Tom Pappert is a 2025 recipient of the Dao Prize and the lead reporter for The Tennessee Star. He also reports for the Star News Network. Follow Tom on X. Email tips to [email protected].
Photo “Estefany Rodriguez Flores” by Estefany Rodriguez Flores.Â
“Our plan was that if we didn’t get a new ICE letter from ICE after a few weeks, the attorney was going to contact ICE about the missed appointment and figure out what she needed to do.”
Yes, when a government building’s closure makes it impossible for people to attend, said government entity re-issues new notices. Courts issue new notices of hearing, SSA issues new notices for intakes, and so did ICE ERO here.
So what’s this nothingburger story about?
No it doesn’t.
Sounds like she did not think the rules applied to HER. Wrong again.
i dont know why anyone gives her sympathy. she did not follow the process and is paying the price.
breaking the law has consequences.
find a spouse who loves you like dems love lawbreakers.