Ludin Rodrigo Juarez-Montenegro v. Todd M. Lyons, Acting Director Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.

Summary

The court granted Ludin Rodrigo Juarez-Montenegro’s amended 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition and denied the government’s motion to dismiss. It held that the petition challenging the manner of his immigration detention was not barred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and that ICE violated due process by revoking his order of supervision without making the findings required by 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(l)(2). The court ordered his immediate release subject to the preexisting order of supervision and awarded costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

Holdings

1. Sections 1252(g) and 1252(b)(9) do not bar district-court jurisdiction over a § 2241 petition that challenges the legality and manner of detention, rather than the validity or execution of the underlying removal order.
2. A noncitizen who was released under an order of supervision and later redetained is governed by the discretionary detention framework of 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6), rather than the mandatory detention framework of § 1231(a)(2).
3. Before a district director revokes an order of supervision under 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(l)(2), the director must make the findings required by the regulation, including that revocation is in the public interest and that circumstances do not reasonably permit referral to the Executive Associate Commissioner.
4. Immediate release subject to the preexisting order of supervision was the appropriate remedy because the government placed Petitioner in custody without following the required revocation procedure, and it was unknowable whether lawful procedures would have produced the same result.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(b)(9) and 1252(g) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over a § 2241 petition challenging the manner and legality of immigration detention rather than the underlying removal order.
2. Whether a noncitizen previously released under an order of supervision is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2) or the discretionary detention framework of § 1231(a)(6) upon redetention.
3. Whether ICE violated the Due Process Clause and its own regulations by revoking the order of supervision without making the findings required by 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(l)(2).
4. Whether immediate release was the appropriate habeas remedy for the procedural due process violation.

Disposition

writ_granted