Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants a preliminary injunction in an immigration habeas action brought by J.O.L.R., an asylum seeker who was re-detained after previously being released into the United States. The court concludes that petitioner has a protected liberty interest in his conditional release and is likely entitled under the Due Process Clause to a pre-deprivation bond hearing before a neutral adjudicator. The court also determines that the government should bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that petitioner is a flight risk or danger to the community.
Holdings
- A noncitizen who was conditionally released into the United States for more than a year while pursuing removal-related relief possesses a protected liberty interest in continued release.
- The Due Process Clause requires a pre-deprivation bond hearing before the government may re-detain a noncitizen who was conditionally released into the United States, absent evidence of urgent concerns.
- The government must prove by clear and convincing evidence at the bond hearing that the noncitizen is a flight risk or danger to the community such that detention is justified.
- Petitioner satisfied the preliminary-injunction requirements because he was likely to succeed on his due-process claim, detention without a required hearing caused irreparable constitutional injury, and the balance of equities and public interest favored relief.
Questions Presented
- Whether a noncitizen who was conditionally released into the United States during removal proceedings possesses a protected liberty interest in continued release.
- Whether the Due Process Clause requires a pre-deprivation bond hearing before the government may re-detain such a noncitizen.
- Whether the government must prove by clear and convincing evidence at that hearing that the noncitizen is a flight risk or danger to the community.
- Whether petitioner satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (41)
- L. v. Lamarque, 351 F.3d 919, 924 (9th Cir. 2003)(followed)
- McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196, 197-98 (9th Cir. 1987)(followed)
- Saravia v. Sessions, 280 F. Supp. 3d 1168, 1176 (N.D. Cal. 2017), aff'd sub nom. Saravia for A.H. v. Sessions, 905 F.3d 1137 (9th Cir. 2018)(followed)
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20, 24 (2008)(followed)
- Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 689-90 (2008)(followed)
- Amoco Production Co. v. Village of Gambell, Alaska, 480 U.S. 531, 542 (1987)(followed)
- Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U.S. 305, 311-12 (1982)(followed)
- Simon v. City & County of San Francisco, 135 F.4th 784, 797 (9th Cir. 2025)(followed)
- Environmental Protection Information Center v. Carlson, 968 F.3d 985, 989 (9th Cir. 2020)(followed)
- Friends of the Wild Swan v. Weber, 767 F.3d 936, 942 (9th Cir. 2014)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 41.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.