Harpreet S. v. Christopher Chestnut, et al.

Harpreet S. · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · January 14, 2026 · No. 1:26-cv-00274-TLN-CSK

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants Petitioner Harpreet S.’s motion for a temporary restraining order challenging his prolonged immigration detention without a bond or custody hearing. The court finds that Petitioner is likely to succeed on a procedural due process claim and orders his immediate release under his prior conditions. The court also enjoins re-arrest or re-detention absent specified constitutional protections and orders Respondents to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue.

Holdings

  1. A noncitizen who was released from immigration custody subject to conditions has a protected liberty interest in remaining out of custody when the government re-detains the person without an intervening violation of the release conditions.
  2. Where a noncitizen with a protected liberty interest is re-detained after conditional release without a bond or custody-redetermination hearing, procedural due process likely requires a hearing to determine whether detention is warranted.
  3. Petitioner satisfied the Winter requirements for a temporary restraining order because he showed likely success on his procedural due process claim, irreparable harm from continued detention, and that the balance of equities and public interest favored relief.
  4. The court found the requirements for issuing a temporary restraining order without notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) were satisfied.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Petitioner was likely to succeed on a procedural due process claim based on his re-detention without notice, a custody determination, or a bond hearing.
  2. Whether Petitioner satisfied the Winter factors for issuance of a temporary restraining order.
  3. Whether the court could issue an ex parte TRO under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b).
  4. Whether Respondents could be enjoined from re-arresting or re-detaining Petitioner absent notice and a pre-deprivation or custody hearing.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (20)

  • Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008)(followed)
  • Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1134-35 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • Hernandez v. Sessions, 872 F.3d 976, 990, 994-95 (9th Cir. 2017)(followed)
  • Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 693-94 (2001)(followed)
  • Kentucky Department of Corrections v. Thompson, 490 U.S. 454, 460 (1989)(followed)
  • Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 481-82 (1972)(followed)
  • Rico-Tapia v. Smith, No. CV 25-00379 SASP-KJM, 2025 WL 2950089, at *8 (D. Haw. Oct. 10, 2025)(followed)
  • Pinchi v. Noem, 792 F. Supp. 3d 1025, 1032 (N.D. Cal. 2025)(followed)
  • Salcedo Aceros v. Kaiser, No. 25-CV-06924-EMC, 2025 WL 2637503, at *6 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 12, 2025)(followed)
  • R.D.T.M. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01141-KES-SKO (HC), 2025 WL 2617255, at *3-4 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 9, 2025)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 20.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…