Summary
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana grants Respondents’ Rule 12(b)(1) motion and dismisses as moot a habeas petition challenging immigration detention. The court concludes that the petitioner’s removal ended the challenged detention and that no collateral consequences or other continuing case or controversy were asserted.
Holdings
- A habeas petition challenging detention is moot when the detention ends and the petitioner no longer presents a live Article III case or controversy, unless a concrete and continuing injury or other collateral consequence remains.
- Dismissal on mootness grounds is without prejudice to future suits on the merits of the same claim and does not constitute a final adjudication on the merits.
Questions Presented
- Whether the petitioner's habeas claim challenging the constitutionality of his detention became moot after his detention ended and he was removed from the United States.
- Whether any asserted collateral consequences preserved an Article III case or controversy after the challenged detention ended.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (8)
- Spencer v. Kemna, 528 U.S. 1, 7 (1998)(followed)
- Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990)(followed)
- Zalawadia v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 2004)(followed)
- Francis v. Lynch, 622 F. App'x 455 (5th Cir. 2015)(followed)
- Odus v. Ashcroft, 61 F. App'x 121, 121 (5th Cir. 2003)(followed)
- Umanzor v. Lambert, 782 F.2d 1299, 1301 (5th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Wilderness Soc. v. Salazar, 603 F. Supp. 2d 52, 72 (D.D.C. 2009)(followed)
- Payne v. Panama Canal Co., 607 F.2d 155, 158 (5th Cir. 1979)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…