Jose Diaz Gomez v. Kevin Raycraft et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan conditionally granted Jose Diaz Gomez’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court held that detention of a noncitizen apprehended within the United States was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory-detention provision of § 1225(b)(2)(A), and that the detention framework violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Respondents were ordered to provide a bond hearing within five business days or release Gomez, and the Attorney General was dismissed as a respondent.

Holdings

1. The court declined to enforce prudential exhaustion against Gomez and alternatively concluded that waiver of exhaustion was appropriate.
2. Section 1226(a), rather than § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs detention of a noncitizen who has resided in the United States and was already within the United States when apprehended and arrested.
3. Gomez's current detention under the mandatory-detention framework of § 1225(b)(2)(A) violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.
4. The Detroit ICE 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 Attorney General as a respondent.

Questions Presented

1. Whether prudential exhaustion of administrative remedies should be enforced against Gomez's § 2241 habeas petition.
2. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) governs the detention of a noncitizen who had resided in the United States and was already within the country when apprehended and arrested.
3. Whether Gomez's detention under the mandatory-detention framework of § 1225(b)(2)(A) violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.
4. Whether the Detroit ICE Field Office Director was the only proper respondent in the habeas action.

Disposition

writ_granted