Erick Ruben Pena v. Kevin Raycraft et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan conditionally granted Erick Ruben Pena’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court concluded that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory-detention provision in § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs his detention and that his continued detention without a bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Respondents were ordered to provide a bond hearing within five business days or release Pena, and certain respondents were dismissed.

Holdings

1. The court declined to enforce prudential exhaustion and alternatively concluded that waiver of exhaustion was appropriate.
2. Section 1226(a), not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs noncitizens who have resided in the United States and were already within the country when apprehended and arrested.
3. Pena's continued detention under the mandatory-detention framework identified by the court violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, requiring a bond hearing or release.
4. The ICE Detroit Field Office Director was not the only proper respondent. The court retained the Field Office Director and the Secretary of Homeland Security and dismissed the United States Department of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should require exhaustion of administrative remedies before considering Pena's § 2241 detention challenge.
2. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) governs the detention of a noncitizen who resided in the United States and was apprehended within the country.
3. Whether Pena's detention without a bond hearing violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
4. Whether the ICE Detroit Field Office Director was the only proper respondent.
5. Whether the petition should be conditionally granted by requiring a bond hearing or immediate release.

Disposition

writ_granted