Jamila Issahaku v. Samuel Olson, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky considers Jamila Issahaku’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging her immigration detention. The court holds that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory-detention provision in § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs the detention of a noncitizen who has been residing in the United States and is subject to removal proceedings. The court grants the petition requesting bond or a bond hearing and proceeds to address the petitioner’s due process claim.

Holdings

1. Section 1226(a), not § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs Issahaku's detention because she was already residing in the United States and was not an arriving noncitizen actively seeking admission when DHS arrested her.
2. Issahaku's detention without an individualized bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, and she was entitled to an individualized custody determination.
3. The district court had authority under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to consider Issahaku's challenge to the lawfulness of her executive detention and to order release or other appropriate relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Issahaku's detention was governed by the mandatory-detention provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or the discretionary detention and bond-hearing provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
2. Whether detention of Issahaku without an opportunity for an individualized bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
3. Whether habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 was available to challenge the lawfulness of Issahaku's immigration detention.

Disposition

writ_granted