Maria Vasquez Juarez v. Kristi Noem

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California granted petitioners’ motion for a preliminary injunction in their challenge to continued immigration detention without individualized bond hearings. The court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than § 1225(b)(2)(A), likely governs petitioners’ detention and that 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(b)(9) and 1252(g) do not bar jurisdiction. Respondents were ordered to provide each petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge within seven days.

Holdings

1. Section 1252(b)(9) did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction over petitioners' challenge to continued detention without an individualized bond hearing.
2. Section 1252(g) did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction over petitioners' challenge to detention without bond redetermination hearings.
3. Petitioners were likely to succeed on their claim that § 1226(a), rather than § 1225(b)(2)(A), governed their detention and permitted individualized bond hearings before an immigration judge.
4. Petitioners satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over petitioners' challenge to continued detention without individualized bond hearings.
2. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over petitioners' challenge to detention without bond redetermination hearings.
3. Whether petitioners were likely to succeed on their claim that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than § 1225(b)(2)(A), governed their detention and entitled them to bond hearings.
4. Whether petitioners satisfied the Winter factors for a preliminary injunction.

Disposition

other