Ali Yildiz v. Pamela Bondi, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico grants Ali Yildiz’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his immigration detention. The court holds that 8 U.S.C. § 1226, rather than § 1225, governs because Yildiz entered the United States years earlier and was arrested away from the border. It orders the Government to provide a bond hearing before an immigration judge within seven days, with the Government bearing the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that continued detention is warranted.

Holdings

1. Section 1226 governed Yildiz's detention because he had effected an entry into the United States and was arrested years after entering, rather than at or near the border while seeking admission.
2. Yildiz's detention violated due process because, after his prior release and residence in the United States, he had a protected liberty interest in remaining out of custody on bond and was redetained without constitutionally adequate procedures.
3. The proper remedy was a prompt bond hearing under § 1226(a) at which the Government had to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Yildiz was a flight risk or danger to the community.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1226 or the mandatory-detention provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) governed Yildiz's detention.
2. Whether detaining Yildiz after his prior release without a bond hearing violated procedural due process.
3. Whether the proper remedy was a prompt bond hearing at which the Government bore the burden of proving that continued detention was justified by clear and convincing evidence.

Disposition

writ_granted