Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted Toan Van Nguyen’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court held that immigration officials violated due process by failing to provide adequate notice of the basis for revoking Nguyen’s release and by failing to provide a prompt informal interview. The court ordered Nguyen’s immediate release subject to his existing order of supervision and denied the remaining claims and temporary restraining order motion as moot.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court had habeas jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 notwithstanding 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
- Whether ICE violated procedural due process by re-detaining Nguyen without providing adequate notice of the reasons for revocation of his supervised release and a prompt informal interview.
- Whether Nguyen's remaining claims concerning Zadvydas v. Davis and removal to a third country should be addressed after relief was granted on the due-process claim.
Holdings
- A district court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to consider Nguyen's challenge to the legality of his immigration detention.
- Before re-detaining a noncitizen released under supervision, the government must provide adequate notice of the reasons for revocation and a prompt informal interview allowing the noncitizen to respond; failure to comply with these requirements may violate procedural due process.
- Nguyen's re-detention violated procedural due process because the notice of revocation was inadequate and the respondents failed to show that a prompt informal interview was provided.
Key quotations
“In summary, the Court concludes that Respondents failed to follow their own regulations in re-detaining Petitioner by failing to: (1) provide him notice that states an adequate basis to revoke his release pursuant; and (2) provide him with a “prompt” informal interview so that he could contest the reasons for his revocation.” (at 7)
“Because the Court grants the petition on the Due Process ground raised in Count 1 of the Petition, Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release Petitioner from custody, subject to the conditions of his preexisting Order of Supervision.” (at 7)
Factual background
Toan Van Nguyen, a Vietnamese national who entered the United States as a refugee in 1984, was ordered removed in 2000 after a car-theft conviction. Because ICE could not remove him for more than a year, he was released from detention under an order of supervision in 2001. ICE arrested him during an annual check-in in September 2025 and issued a notice revoking his release, but the record did not show that he received an adequate explanation of the revocation or a prompt informal interview.
Procedural history
Nguyen filed a § 2241 habeas petition and a motion for a temporary restraining order after ICE re-detained him during an annual check-in. Following an order to show cause, the respondents filed a return and Nguyen filed a traverse. The court granted habeas relief on the due-process claim, ordered Nguyen released subject to his preexisting order of supervision, denied the remaining grounds without prejudice as moot, denied the TRO as moot, and closed the case.
Remand instructions
Respondents were ordered to immediately release Nguyen from custody subject to the conditions of his preexisting order of supervision. The parties were ordered to file a joint status report by November 26, 2025, confirming his release. The remaining habeas grounds were denied as moot and without prejudice, the TRO motion was denied as moot, and the case was closed.