A Texas man is fighting to get his wife and four children back after he says they were unexpectedly deported to Mexico.

Federico Arellano is a U.S. citizen, and says three of his four kids are too. He says there has been a misunderstanding and that his family was misled. 

Now, a video call is the only way he’s been able to see his family.

Agents deport family

ICE agents deported Arellano’s wife, Christina Salazar, and their four kids to Mexico last week after they say they were told to come to the ICE field office in Houston to discuss Salazar’s immigration case.

“They told me that they were going to take her to Mexico because she had a deportation order,” Arellano said.

A judge signed off on the order in early October after Salazar missed an immigration hearing. The family says Salazar was recovering from giving birth to premature twins and doctors recommended she recover at home during that time.

Arellano said he informed the court about the situation and claims they reassured him by phone the date could be rescheduled.

Nearly two months later, Arellano said agents detained his wife and then their four children.

Immigration attorney Isaias Torres, who represents the family, said he has not seen an instance like this one that involves a family.

“I’ve seen criminals, ardent criminals, people with prior deportation. … I don’t understand why this happened,” Torres said. 

Hopes to reunite

A video call is now the only way Arellano can see Salazar and their kids for the foreseeable future.

“I’m alone. I have no one to help me with my kids here and they are really sick,” Salazar said in a video call from Reynosa, Mexico.

Attorneys for the family said they are reaching out to members of Congress for help. ICE and the DOJ have not responded to CBS News for a request for comment.

Meanwhile, Arellano said he just wants his family back.

“To get them back and of course they return to me just as they were taken away. I want them to return to me,” he said.

Washington — The Senate approved the mammoth $895 billion National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, despite concern from some Democrats over a controversial policy restricting gender-affirming care for children of servicemembers. 

In a 85 to 14 vote, the Senate approved the legislation, which the House passed last week. Eleven Democrats and three Republicans voted against it in the upper chamber. The bill now heads to President Biden’s desk for his signature. 

The 1,800 page national security legislation to authorize funding for the Defense Department for fiscal year 2025. But the bill includes a handful of controversial policies, like the gender-affirming care restriction, and lost support from the majority of Democrats in the House. 

The Democratic-controlled Senate pushed forward with the measure nonetheless. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer noted that while the NDAA “isn’t perfect,” it still “includes some very good things that Democrats fought for” — citing provisions aimed at standing up against the Chinese Communist Party, boosting the use of artificial intelligence for national defense and expanding domestic tech innovation.

“Congress has passed the NDAA on a bipartisan basis for over six straight decades, and this year will be no different,” Schumer said ahead of the vote on Wednesday. “We’re passing the NDAA and that’s a very good thing.”

Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, derided the gender-affirming care restriction earlier this week, calling it “the product of a nationwide campaign against trans rights” and arguing that the legislation’s approval would mark “the first anti-LGBTQ law passed by Congress in decades.”

Still, the outcome of the vote was all but guaranteed after the Senate advanced the measure on Monday in a 83-12 procedural vote. 

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, celebrated the NDAA’s “immense accomplishments,” including a 14.5% pay raise for junior service members and investments in recruitment capabilities. But he said Congress “missed an opportunity to strengthen the president-elect’s hand as he takes office in a precarious world situation.”

Wicker outlined that the Armed Services Committee proposed $25 billion for modernization programs, including for missile defense, ship building and counter-drone technology, saying “this should have been part of the bill today.”

Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who chairs the Armed Services Committee, called the legislation a “strong, forward looking bill that we can all be proud of.” But he said he “strongly” disagrees with the inclusion of the gender-affirming care provision, calling it a “misguided provision.” 

“I share many of my colleagues’ frustrations that the bill includes a provision that would prohibit gender-affirming health care for minors under certain circumstances,” Reed noted, adding that he voted against the provision in committee. “We will continue to work to ensure the health care rights of all military personnel and their dependents.”