Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied Phong Phan’s motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in his habeas corpus action challenging his immigration detention. The court held that the requested relief would improperly require the court to make the initial determination concerning changed circumstances justifying re-detention, intruding on executive-branch authority under the governing immigration regulations.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court could order ICE to release Phan and prohibit his re-detention unless the court first made an individualized finding that changed circumstances made removal reasonably foreseeable and that detention was justified.
- Whether Phan was entitled to a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction under the applicable four-factor standard.
- Whether Phan's transfer to detention facilities outside the Eastern District of California deprived the court of habeas jurisdiction.
Holdings
- The requested injunction was improper because the regulation assigns the initial determination that changed circumstances make removal significantly likely in the reasonably foreseeable future to ICE, not to the court. The court may review ICE's determination under the regulatory factors but may not be required to make the initial finding before ICE may re-detain the noncitizen.
- Phan's motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction were denied because the requested relief exceeded the court's authority.
- Phan's transfer after filing the habeas petition did not deprive the Eastern District of California of habeas jurisdiction.
Key quotations
“However, once that time passes and after “removal is no longer reasonably foreseeable, continued detention is no longer authorized by statute”, and the noncitizen must be released.” (Discussion)
“At bottom, Petitioner’s requested injunctive relief would require this court to make the initial finding that a changed circumstance has occurred such that Petitioner can be re-detained.” (Discussion)
“Accordingly, this court lacks authority to grant the relief requested, and on this basis alone, the motions will be denied.” (Discussion)
Factual background
Phong Phan, a Vietnamese native, entered the United States as a refugee in 1981 and later became a lawful permanent resident. After a California conviction and approximately twenty-nine years in state prison, he was placed in immigration detention, accepted a removal order, and was released in 2021 on an order of supervision. ICE re-detained him during a June 3, 2025 check-in appointment after identifying him as subject to an executable final order of removal, asserting that detention was authorized under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6).
Procedural history
Phan filed his § 2241 petition and motions on June 23, 2025, after ICE re-detained him pursuant to a final order of removal. Respondents opposed the motions, Phan replied, and the court held a hearing on June 30, 2025. The court denied the motions and referred the matter to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.
Remand instructions
The matter was referred to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.