Segundo Morocho Morocho v. Steve Kelley et al.

Summary

This Report and Recommendation addresses a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the detention of an Ecuadorian noncitizen under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) without a bond hearing. The magistrate judge recommends finding jurisdiction, concluding that detention is governed by § 1226(a), ordering a bond hearing within seven business days or release, and declining to reach the separate due process claim.

Holdings

1. The jurisdiction-stripping provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(5), (b)(9), and (g) do not bar review of Petitioner's claim because he challenged the manner and legality of his detention, not a removal order, the decision to commence removal proceedings, or the merits of his removability.
2. Petitioner was not subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) because, although he could technically qualify as an applicant for admission under § 1225(a)(1), he was not presently and actively seeking admission when arrested after living in the United States for many years. His detention was instead governed by § 1226(a), which entitles him to an individualized bond hearing.
3. The court recommended declining to reach the merits of Petitioner's due-process claim because the statutory interpretation of § 1226(a) supplied the requested relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(5), (b)(9), or (g) stripped the district court of jurisdiction to consider a habeas challenge to detention without a bond hearing.
2. Whether Petitioner's detention was governed by the mandatory-detention provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or by the discretionary detention and bond framework in § 1226(a).
3. Whether the court should decide Petitioner's constitutional due-process challenge to detention without a bond hearing.

Disposition

other