Immigration attorney Willy Allen issued a strong warning to Cubans with I-220A who are not detained: never accept a voluntary departure if you have the option to fight your case from within the United States.
The warning arises from the case of Dairon Fuentes Rodríguez, a Cuban who requested voluntary departure to avoid a 10-year penalty for formal deportation, was sent to Cuba, and the regime rejected him in Havana, returning him on the same flight, despite having no criminal record in Cuba. U.S. immigration authorities sent him back to a detention center in Texas, where he has alreadybeen incarcerated for seven months.
"My recommendation has always been: if you're Cuban with an I-220A, and you're not detained and want to fight, do not accept voluntary departure," Allen stated during an interview with Tania Costa.
The lawyer explained precisely why that decision could be devastating. In his opinion, voluntary departure grants between 90 and 120 days to leave the country, but legal return can take four years or more. For Dairon Fuentes to return legally, he would need to go through three interconnected steps: the approval of the I-130 —a family petition filed over two years ago—, the approval of an I-601A waiver for illegal entry —which currently takes about 43 months to process— and the completion of a consular process. On top of this, there is the penalty associated with voluntary departure, which adds an additional two to three years.
"I needed to have the I-130 approved, I had to have an approved 601A waiver for illegal entry, and it had to be a consular process which can take a long time, plus there is a penalty of two to three years for voluntary departure. This would have delayed my return to the United States by at least four years," Allen explained.
While Dairon Fuentes remains in custody, his wife Aylín Hernández —on parole and 36 weeks pregnant— is the only breadwinner for the family.
"Four years of separation from his wife and children. So one must take all factors into consideration and be well-informed," the lawyer emphasized.
Allen revealed that he personally tries to avoid voluntary departures and only accepts them when the destination country ensures the migrant's reception. Of the two Cubans to whom he accepted this option, one had residency in Mexico and the other needed to go to Cuba to process his Spanish nationality. "I try to avoid voluntary departures," he insisted.
The case of Dairon Fuentes also illustrates a failure of the Cuban regime. Under the immigration agreement signed with the Obama Administration in January 2017 —when the "wet foot, dry foot" policy was eliminated— Cuba committed to accepting the repatriation of all its citizens who had entered the United States after March of that year. Dairon Fuentes entered in 2022, within that framework, but the regime rejected him anyway. Over 42,000 Cubans currently have final deportation orders that Cuba refuses to enforce.
The alternative that Allen advocates for Cubans with I-220A is to fight the case from within through an appeal. The process may be lengthy, but it provides a real solution: “During the appeal, the I-220A can be converted into parole. They lift the deportation and you become a resident. It’s about having information and knowing what’s happening.”
That avenue gained more strength following the ruling that the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued in February 2026, which overturned previous decisions by the Immigration Appeals Board and ordered a reexamination of the admission criteria for Cubans with I-220A, potentially opening a pathway to residency under the Cuban Adjustment Act. Between 400,000 and 500,000 Cubans in the United States find themselves in this situation, awaiting a final resolution.
Allen spare no words in describing what happened with Dairon Fuentes: "For me, it's incredible that Cuba put him in this situation. I-220A, he requested voluntary departure, his country did not accept it, and now they put him in a jail here in the United States."
Filed under: