Samara Pereira Trega v. Pamela Bondi, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the United States, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Maine dismissed without prejudice Samara Pereira Trega’s habeas petition challenging her detention during immigration removal proceedings. The court held that her bond-hearing and access-to-counsel claims were subject to the Immigration and Nationality Act’s claims-channeling provisions and that she had received constitutionally required process through an immigration judge’s bond hearing. The court also concluded that her courthouse-arrest claim did not establish a basis for habeas relief.

Holdings

1. Trega was subject to § 1226(a)'s discretionary detention scheme and therefore was entitled to a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge.
2. The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over claims concerning the Immigration Judge's bond determination and access to counsel because those claims arose from or were inextricably intertwined with ongoing removal proceedings and were channeled into the administrative process by 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9).
3. Trega failed to demonstrate that her courthouse arrest was unlawful or violated due process, and the alleged illegality of the arrest could not support habeas relief because it did not bear on the legality of her detention under a valid Form I-200 warrant.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Trega was entitled to a bond hearing under the discretionary detention scheme of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
2. Whether the district court had jurisdiction to review Trega's challenge to the constitutional adequacy of her bond hearing and her access-to-counsel claims.
3. Whether Trega's arrest inside a Massachusetts courthouse violated due process or otherwise supported habeas relief.
4. Whether an allegedly unlawful immigration arrest can invalidate detention or provide a basis for habeas relief when the arrest was made pursuant to a valid Form I-200 warrant.

Disposition

dismissed