Jistzmar Arroyo Rodriguez v. Jason Woosley, Jailer, Grayson County Jail; Samuel Olson, Interim Field Office Director, Chicago Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky considers Jistzmar Arroyo Rodriguez’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging her immigration detention. The court concludes that 8 U.S.C. § 1226, rather than § 1225, governs her detention because she was already present in the United States, was in regular removal proceedings, and was arrested under a Form I-200 warrant. The court grants the petition and requires the process to which she is entitled under § 1226, including a bond hearing before an immigration judge.

Holdings

1. Section 1252(b)(9) did not bar jurisdiction because Rodriguez challenged the statutory and constitutional validity of her detention rather than an order of removal, the decision to seek removal, or the process by which removability would be determined.
2. Section 1226, not § 1225(b)(2)(A), governed Rodriguez's detention because she had been present in the United States for more than two years, was in regular removal proceedings, was not presently seeking admission, and had been arrested under a Form I-200 warrant authorized by § 1226.
3. Rodriguez's continued detention without an individualized merits bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and the INA.
4. The court ordered Rodriguez's release because of the unlawful detention and required the government to provide a bond hearing on the merits before a neutral immigration judge before any redetention.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over Rodriguez's habeas challenge to her immigration detention.
2. Whether Rodriguez, a noncitizen who had been present in the United States for more than two years and was in regular removal proceedings, was subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or the discretionary detention and bond-hearing framework of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
3. Whether Rodriguez's continued detention without an individualized merits bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and the INA.
4. Whether release and a bond hearing before a neutral immigration judge were appropriate remedies.

Disposition

writ_granted