Mario Jose Castro Diaz v. Miami Field Office Director et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida grants Mario Jose Castro Diaz’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court holds that his detention is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory-detention provision of § 1225(b)(2), and that he is entitled to an individualized bond hearing. Respondents must provide a bond hearing within ten days or release him under reasonable conditions.

Holdings

1. Sections 1252(g) and 1252(b)(9) do not strip the district court of jurisdiction over this habeas challenge to the statutory basis for Castro Diaz's detention.
2. Administrative exhaustion was excused because pursuing it would have been futile.
3. Castro Diaz's current detention is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), not the mandatory-detention provision in § 1225(b)(2), because applying § 1225(b)(2) years after his border apprehension and after his release into the country would be inconsistent with the distinction between noncitizens seeking initial admission and those already inside the United States after entry.
4. A noncitizen detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) is entitled to an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) or § 1252(b)(9) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over Castro Diaz's habeas challenge to his detention.
2. Whether Castro Diaz was required to exhaust administrative remedies before seeking habeas relief, and whether exhaustion should be excused as futile.
3. Whether Castro Diaz's detention was governed by the mandatory-detention provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) or the discretionary-detention provision in § 1226(a).
4. Whether a noncitizen detained under § 1226(a) is entitled to an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge.

Disposition

granted