Jahaira Abigail Tenorio Rugama v. Christopher Chestnut, et al.

Jahaira Abigail Tenorio Rugama v. Christopher Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-1918 AC (E.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2025) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · December 22, 2025 · No. 1:25-cv-1918 AC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California granted petitioner Jahaira Abigail Tenorio Rugama's motion for a temporary restraining order, converting it to a preliminary injunction. The court ordered her immediate release from immigration custody under her prior release conditions and required a pre-deprivation bond hearing before any re-detention. The court also waived the bond requirement and directed petitioner to address whether the habeas proceedings should be stayed pending an appeal in Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock.

Holdings

  1. Section 1226, rather than § 1225(b)(2)(A), applies to a noncitizen like petitioner who is already living in the United States after parole and is not presently seeking admission.
  2. Petitioner demonstrated at least a serious question that her re-detention violated substantive due process because respondents had not shown that the detention served a permissible nonpunitive purpose.
  3. Petitioner was likely entitled to procedural protections before re-detention, including notice and a neutral pre-deprivation custody or bond hearing under § 1226(a), because her prior parole and continued compliance created a protected liberty interest.
  4. Petitioner satisfied the Winter factors and was entitled to preliminary injunctive relief.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether petitioner was likely to succeed on her claim that re-detention without a legitimate nonpunitive justification violated substantive due process.
  2. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1226, rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), governed petitioner's detention.
  3. Whether petitioner had a protected liberty interest in continued release and was likely deprived of procedural due process when she was re-detained without notice or a pre-deprivation custody or bond hearing.
  4. Whether petitioner satisfied the Winter factors for preliminary injunctive relief.
  5. Whether the proceedings should be stayed pending the appeal in Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (40)

  • Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, 779 F. Supp. 3d 1239 (W.D. Wash. 2025)(pending appeal; possible dispositive authority)
  • Johnson v. Gill, 883 F.3d 756, 761 (9th Cir. 2018)(followed)
  • Stuhlbarg Int’l Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832, 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001)(followed)
  • Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008)(followed)
  • Disney Enters., Inc. v. VidAngel, Inc., 869 F.3d 848, 856 (9th Cir. 2017)(followed)
  • Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733, 740 (9th Cir. 2015)(followed)
  • All. for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1135 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 690, 693 (2001)(followed)
  • Valencia Zapata v. Kaiser, No. 25-cv-7492 RFL, 2025 WL 2741654, at *11 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 26, 2025)(followed)
  • Aroldo Rodriguez Diaz v. Merrick Garland, Rodriguez Diaz v. Garland, 53 F.4th 1189, 1196-97, 1206 (9th Cir. 2022)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 40.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…