Abdirisak Mohamed Hirey v. Kristi Noem, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa dismissed Abdirisak Mohamed Hirey’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the termination of his immigration parole and resulting detention. The court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), as interpreted by the Eighth Circuit in Fofana v. Noem, deprived the court of jurisdiction to review the challenged parole decision and related actions. Hirey’s motion for a temporary restraining order was denied as moot.

Holdings

1. When the Secretary of Homeland Security has discretionary statutory authority over an immigration decision, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) precludes judicial review of all aspects of that decision, including challenges to the decision-making process and alleged noncompliance with statutory or regulatory requirements. The district court therefore lacked jurisdiction to review whether Hirey's parole was lawfully terminated.
2. Hirey's motion for a temporary restraining order was denied as moot because the habeas petition was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) deprives the district court of jurisdiction to review a challenge to the termination of discretionary immigration parole, including alleged failures to conduct an individualized analysis, provide statutory notice, and comply with regulations.
2. Whether Hirey's request for a temporary restraining order should be granted while the habeas petition was pending.

Disposition

dismissed