Ivan Rudiuk v. Merrick Garland, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted Ivan Rudiuk’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his continued immigration detention. Applying Zadvydas v. Davis, the court found that the Government had not shown that Rudiuk’s removal to a third country was reasonably foreseeable. The court ordered Respondents to release Rudiuk under appropriate conditions or provide him with a hearing before an immigration judge by December 1, 2025, and retained jurisdiction to enforce the judgment.

Holdings

1. An alien may not be detained indefinitely after a final order of removal; detention is limited to the period reasonably necessary to bring about removal, and continued detention is impermissible when removal is not reasonably foreseeable.
2. A conclusory assertion that removal to an unidentified third country is likely is insufficient to establish that removal is reasonably foreseeable; the Government must provide real evidentiary support for its position.
3. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus was granted, and Respondents were required either to release Petitioner with appropriate conditions or supervision or provide a hearing before an Immigration Judge to determine whether he was a flight risk or danger to the community.

Questions Presented

1. Whether continued detention after a final order of removal violated the limits recognized in Zadvydas v. Davis because removal was not reasonably foreseeable.
2. Whether the Government's conclusory assertion that Petitioner might be removed to an unidentified third country was sufficient to establish that removal was reasonably likely in the foreseeable future.
3. What relief was appropriate upon finding that removal was not reasonably foreseeable.

Disposition

writ_granted