Junel Methelus v. Markwayne Mullin, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky grants Junel Methelus’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court holds that immigration officials violated his due process rights by detaining him without properly terminating his parole and concludes that his detention is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2). The court determines that a constitutionally adequate individualized bond hearing, with the government bearing the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence, is the appropriate remedy.

Holdings

1. The Boone County jailer was a proper respondent because he exercised day-to-day control over the facility where Methelus was detained.
2. DHS and ICE violated Methelus's rights by detaining him before properly terminating his parole through written notice and an individualized determination.
3. The expiration of Methelus's parole did not return him to the status of an arriving alien subject to mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2); his detention was governed by the discretionary detention framework of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
4. Methelus's continued detention under § 1226(a) without an individualized bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment, and he was entitled to a constitutionally adequate bond hearing at which the government bore the burden of proving dangerousness or flight risk by clear and convincing evidence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Boone County jailer was a proper respondent in Methelus's § 2241 habeas petition.
2. Whether DHS and ICE lawfully terminated Methelus's parole before transferring him to immigration detention.
3. Whether the expiration of parole returned Methelus to the status of an arriving alien subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2), or instead placed his detention under the discretionary framework of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
4. Whether Methelus's continued detention without an individualized bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.
5. What remedy was appropriate for the unlawful detention and due process violation.

Disposition

writ_granted