Moses Onyango Okoth v. Judge Edwards et al.

Okoth · United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Alexandria Division · May 4, 2026 · No. 1:26-CV-01411

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana directs service of a pro se immigration detainee’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court orders the respondents to file a response within 21 days after service, including summary judgment evidence concerning the lawfulness of the detention, and permits the petitioner seven days to reply. The order states that the court will determine whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary and, if not, issue a report and recommendation.

Holdings

  1. The court may, in its discretion, direct a respondent to file an answer, motion, or other response to a habeas petition, and it directed the respondents to respond to Okoth's petition.
  2. A 21-day period for the government's response, followed by a seven-day period for the petitioner's reply, was reasonable and appropriate for this detention challenge.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court should require the respondents to answer a § 2241 petition challenging the lawfulness of immigration detention.
  2. Whether a 21-day period for the government's response and a seven-day period for the petitioner's reply were reasonable and appropriate.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (6)

  • Danforth v. Minnesota, 552 U.S. 264, 278 (2008)(followed)
  • Maniar v. Warden Pine Prairie Corr. Ctr., 6:18-CV-00544, 2018 WL 4869383, at *1 (W.D. La. 2018)(followed)
  • Hickey v. Adler, 2008 WL 835764, at *2 (E.D. Cal. 2008)(followed)
  • Castillo v. Pratt, 162 F. Supp. 2d 575, 577 (N.D. Tex. 2001)(followed)
  • Wyant v. Edwards, 952 F. Supp. 348 (S.D. W.Va. 1997)(followed)
  • Taylor v. Gusman, 20-CV-449, 2020 WL 1848073, at *1 (E.D. La. Apr. 13, 2020)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…