Andrey Nossov v. Angela Hoover, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania grants Andrey Nossov’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court holds that Nossov, who had lived in the United States after being paroled and was not actively seeking admission, was subject to discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A). The court finds that his continued detention without a bond hearing violated procedural due process and orders his immediate release, while imposing conditions governing any future detention.

Holdings

1. The court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 because Nossov challenged the legality of his detention rather than the commencement of removal proceedings, adjudication of his case, execution of a removal order, or a final removal order.
2. Exhaustion was not required because further administrative review would have been futile where Nossov was detained under § 1225(b)(2)(A), which the court determined precluded an immigration judge from conducting a bond hearing.
3. Section 1225(b)(2)(A)'s mandatory detention provision did not apply to Nossov because, after entering the United States, being paroled, and residing in the country for years, he was not actively and presently seeking admission.
4. Nossov's continued detention without a bond hearing violated procedural due process.
5. Nossov may file a motion for attorneys' fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act within thirty days after entry of judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(g), 1252(b)(9), or 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over Nossov's § 2241 challenge to his immigration detention.
2. Whether exhaustion of administrative remedies was required before the court could consider Nossov's habeas petition.
3. Whether a noncitizen who entered the United States, was paroled, and resided in the country for an extended period remained subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), or instead was subject to discretionary detention under § 1226(a).
4. Whether Nossov's continued detention without a bond hearing violated procedural due process.
5. Whether Nossov could seek attorneys' fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

Disposition

writ_granted