Dos argentinos, dos aeropuertos de Estados Unidos y una coincidencia: ambos fueron detenidos cuando estaban por tomar vuelos internos y atravesaban procesos migratorios que todavía no habían sido resueltos. Los casos de Iliana Noelí Lick y Matías Pourrain ponen el foco sobre una estrategia que el gobierno de Donald Trump profundizó para localizar a extranjeros a partir de la información de los pasajeros que circulan por las terminales aéreas.

El mecanismo se apoya en una mayor cooperación entre la Administración de Seguridad en el Transporte (TSA), encargada de los controles de seguridad en los aeropuertos, y el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE).

Un acuerdo firmado entre ambas agencias en mayo de 2025 amplió el intercambio de información sobre pasajeros. Bajo la administración Trump, esos datos comenzaron a ser utilizados con mayor intensidad para identificar a personas que podrían encontrarse en una situación migratoria irregular o ser consideradas deportables, incluso cuando no tienen antecedentes penales.

De esta manera, los aeropuertos se convirtieron en puntos estratégicos para los agentes migratorios. La TSA dispone de información anticipada de quienes tienen previsto abordar un avión y esos datos pueden ser contrastados con las bases utilizadas por las autoridades de inmigración.

El alcance de esa cooperación marca una diferencia respecto de prácticas anteriores, cuando el intercambio estaba principalmente relacionado con investigaciones sobre delitos federales o cuestiones vinculadas con la seguridad. Ahora también puede derivar en procedimientos por infracciones exclusivamente migratorias.

Dos argentinos detenidos antes de tomar un avión

Uno de los casos es el de Iliana Noelí Lick, una argentina de 30 años que trabajaba como niñera y vivía en Filadelfia. Fue detenida el 11 de julio en el aeropuerto de esa ciudad cuando se preparaba para viajar a Kansas City para ver un partido de la Selección argentina durante el Mundial.

Según su entorno, Lick había ingresado legalmente a Estados Unidos y tenía pendiente una solicitud migratoria para permanecer en el país. Su novio, Steven Melchiorre, aseguró que nunca había cometido delitos ni faltado a una audiencia.

La argentina trabajaba para dos familias y cuidaba a tres chicos menores de cinco años. Tras su detención, sus allegados iniciaron una campaña para afrontar los gastos de abogados especializados en inmigración y otros costos derivados del proceso. Finalmente, la Justicia le concedió la liberación tras el pago de una fianza de US$10.000.

Casi un mes después apareció un segundo caso con características similares.

Matías Pourrain, futbolista argentino del Miami United FC, fue detenido cuando se disponía a abordar un avión en Miami junto con sus compañeros. El equipo debía viajar a Los Ángeles para disputar una competencia nacional después de consagrarse campeón del Sudeste.

Su hermano contó a TN que Pourrain pasó los controles y estaba cerca de subir al avión cuando fue apartado para responder algunas preguntas. Le dijeron que el procedimiento demoraría alrededor de diez minutos, pero no regresó con el resto del plantel.

La familia sostiene que el jugador se encontraba en un proceso de asilo, tenía número de Social Security y permiso de trabajo, pero todavía esperaba una entrevista vinculada con su trámite migratorio.

Horas después pudo comunicarse durante apenas unos segundos con su pareja. Según relató su hermano, alcanzó a decirle que creía encontrarse en un centro del ICE en Miramar, Florida, mientras esperaba conocer dónde continuaría detenido.

Los dos episodios ocurren mientras el ICE intensifica sus procedimientos en terminales aéreas. Esto no significa que cualquier extranjero que tome un avión vaya a ser detenido ni que tener un trámite migratorio pendiente implique automáticamente una orden de arresto. Cada situación depende del estatus particular de la persona y de las decisiones adoptadas por las autoridades migratorias.

Sin embargo, los casos registrados durante los últimos meses muestran que los aeropuertos adquirieron un nuevo peso dentro de la política migratoria de la administración Trump.

Russian President Vladimir Putin could attack a NATO member country in the next few years in an attempt to fragment the post-World War II organization and test Article 5, new U.S. intelligence has found, according to a report.

While U.S. intelligence had previously assessed that Putin wouldn’t launch an assault on a NATO country while still involved in the war in Ukraine, the Russian president is now looking for a victory as Ukraine makes gains, and the U.S. and Europe have seen increasing signs he is testing the organization, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.

That includes a drone that hit a Romanian apartment building in May and cruise missiles that landed in Poland late last month, a NATO country.

RUSSIA PREPARING HYBRID ATTACKS ON NATO’S EASTERN FLANK, INTELLIGENCE WARNS

Article 5 of NATO states that an attack on one country is an attack on all countries.

The assessment said it would likely be a limited attack that could range anywhere from a cyberattack to a small-scale land incursion and would likely be focused on the Baltics or Poland.

The attack could happen any time between this fall and 2029, the assessment said.

«The question mark is how the United States would respond in that case,» Heather Conley, senior fellow with the American Enterprise Institute, told the Journal. «It has always been a goal [of Russia’s] to challenge the credibility of NATO and to separate the United States from its allies.»

THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT AMERICAN WEAPONS SYSTEMS NATO IS EAGER TO HAVE

The assessment also comes amid claims the United States’ munitions stockpile has been depleted by arms sent to support Ukraine and due to the war in Iran.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell, however, called those claims false.

Police and forensic investigators examine the location of impact after a Russian drone struck an apartment building in Galati, Romania, May 29, 2026. (AFP via Getty Images)

«We have everything required to strike at the time and place of the president’s choosing,» Parnell told the Journal. «Across multiple combatant commands, we have already executed successful operations while maintaining a deep, ready arsenal to defend our people and our interests. Any adversary who confuses media noise with American weakness will discover the truth the hard way.»

A land incursion was deemed the least likely because it would trigger Article 5, but it’s unclear what the response would be to something like a cyberattack.

REPORT WARNS RUSSIA USING SHADOW FLEET TO PROBE NATO DRONE DEFENSES

The Polish army secures a large crater, the probable impact site of a projectile linked to overnight strikes in Ukraine, in Tarnawa-Kolonia, eastern Poland, July 30, 2026. (TVN Poland/AFPTV/AFP via Getty Images)

«This has always been NATO’s challenge to respond to a sub-Article 5 attack, and it’s been very true that to this point, NATO allies have preferred not to escalate,» Conley told the Journal.

Fox News Digital has reached out to NATO for comment.

Col. Martin O’Donnell, a NATO spokesman, told the Journal, «We are always thinking through and preparing for any number of scenarios. NATO is watching, and we are ready to deter and defend as necessary, which we continue to demonstrate.»

The Justice Department is accusing Duke University School of Law of favoring Black and Hispanic applicants over White and Asian applicants with the same academic records in its admissions process, which the Trump administration argues the law school used to meet its «diversity goals.»

«Duke Law School doesn’t get a free pass to discriminate against white and Asian students simply because it thinks it has good intentions,» Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division said.

In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA) that it was unconstitutional for colleges and higher education institutions to consider a student’s race in their admissions processes. The decision prompted the Trump administration to open investigations into alleged race-based discrimination at dozens of colleges and universities.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ZEROES IN ON UCLA FOR ALLEGED ILLEGAL DEI ADMISSIONS AS ELITE SCHOOL CRACKDOWN EXPANDS

The Civil Rights Division, which began investigating Duke Law in April 2025, found that Black applicants who applied in 2025 had roughly 3.5 times the chance of admission as Asian applicants with the same academic credentials, according to a Justice Department letter sent to Duke Law. Investigators found that the median LSAT score for accepted Black applicants was lower than the median score for rejected Asian and White applicants.

«This consistent difference in the test scores between students of different racial groups is substantial and cannot be explained by a coincidence,» the letter stated. «The magnitude and durability of these preferences across multiple cycles (including post-SFFA) confirm intentional discrimination.»

The Trump administration’s review of internal communications found that the law school began preparing for the Supreme Court’s SFFA ruling so its admissions process could continue «to meet the Law School’s goals for a broadly diverse student body.»

For instance, Duke Law’s post-SFFA guidance for admissions allowed officials to «consider applicants’ discussion of how race affected their life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.» Applicants provided these discussions in short-answer essays, where admissions officials could then «tag» the responses to provide context for weaker academic records when evaluating applicants.

COAST GUARD ENDING RACE-BASED ADMISSIONS FOR OFFICER COMMISSIONING PROGRAM UNDER TRUMP DEI CRACKDOWN

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon arrives for a news conference at the Justice Department on September 29, 2025, in Washington, DC. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Duke Law states that it values «students with a wide range of experiences, backgrounds, and interests that may not be directly related to their legal ambitions,» encouraging applicants to «highlight different elements» of who they are.

«Using ‘diversity’ essay questions to identify preferred races for admission is still illegal discrimination based on race, and this Department is committed to eliminating it everywhere we find it, including in our nation’s law schools,» Dhillon said in a statement.

After SFFA, Duke Law admissions continued to release reports highlighting the school’s diversity and its efforts to achieve «race-neutral» admissions standards. In a May 2024 annual review, the associate dean of admissions highlighted the diversity of the incoming fall 2023 class, including the number of Latino, Black and Asian or Asian American students.

In the school’s 2025 Annual Review Memorandum, the admissions dean suggested that the law school can gauge the diversity of its student body by observing students on campus rather than compiling formal statistics.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

FILE – This Jan. 28, 2019 file photo shows the entrance to the main Duke University campus in Durham, N.C.  (AP Photo/Gerry Broome, File)

A Duke University spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the university is aware of the Justice Department’s allegations.

«The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division issued a letter of findings related to Duke Law’s admissions practices. We are reviewing the letter and its conclusions carefully. Duke is committed to complying with the law and will continue to do so in a manner that is consistent with our academic mission,» a Duke University spokesperson said.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Justice Department for additional comment.