Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida grants Mohammad Abdelrahman Samhan’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the revocation of his order of supervision and resulting immigration detention. The court holds that respondents failed to provide the required notice and informal interview under applicable regulations and the Fifth Amendment, and orders Samhan’s release subject to his preexisting order of supervision.
Holdings
- Section 1252(g) did not bar jurisdiction because Petitioner challenged Respondents' compliance with the legal procedures governing revocation of his order of supervision, rather than the underlying removal order or the discretionary decision to execute it.
- Petitioner's Zadvydas claim was premature because he had been detained for less than the presumptively reasonable six-month period.
- Respondents violated 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(l) by revoking Petitioner's order of supervision and redetaining him without providing the required meaningful notice and informal interview giving him an opportunity to respond to the reasons for revocation.
- Respondents' failure to provide the required notice and informal interview violated Petitioner's procedural due process rights, rendered his detention unlawful, and required his release.
Questions Presented
- Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) stripped the district court of jurisdiction to review Petitioner's challenge to the procedures used to revoke his order of supervision and detain him.
- Whether Petitioner's challenge to detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) presented a cognizable statutory or constitutional habeas claim.
- Whether Respondents violated 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(l) and the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause by revoking Petitioner's order of supervision and redetaining him without providing the required notice and informal interview.
- Whether Petitioner's Zadvydas claim was ripe where he had been detained for less than six months.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (20)
- Thomas v. Tyco Int'l Mgmt Co., LLC, 262 F. Supp. 3d 1328, 1340-41 (S.D. Fla. 2017)(followed)
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994)(followed)
- Barrios v. Ripa, No. 1:25-CV-22644, 2025 WL 2280485, at *4-*5 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 8, 2025)(followed)
- Resnick v. AvMed, Inc., 693 F.3d 1317, 1323 (11th Cir. 2012)(followed)
- I.N.S. v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 301 (2001)(followed)
- Oscar v. Ripe, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1324, 1329 (S.D. Fla. 2024)(followed)
- Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510, 516-17 (2003)(followed)
- Buriev v. Warden, GEO, Broward Transitional Ctr., No. 25-CV-60459, 2025 WL 2763202, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 26, 2025)(followed)
- Grigorian v. Bondi, No. 25-CV-22914-RAR, 2025 WL 2604573, at *2-*4, *6-*10 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 9, 2025)(followed)
- Madu v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 470 F.3d 1362, 1368 (11th Cir. 2006)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 20.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…