Yennifer Valeria Davila Mercado v. Todd M. Lyons, Acting Director of US ICE, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas grants Yennifer Valeria Davila Mercado’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court holds that the respondents may not detain her under the mandatory-detention provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1225 because she had previously been released into full removal proceedings and had been present in the United States for more than two years; instead, § 1226(a) applies and entitles her to a bond hearing. The court orders her release under appropriate conditions and prohibits removal or transfer based on the challenged detention.

Holdings

1. Section 1252(g) did not bar jurisdiction because Petitioner challenged the basis for her detention, not the decision to commence proceedings, adjudicate her case, or execute a removal order.
2. Section 1225(b)(4) did not deprive the court of jurisdiction over Petitioner's detention challenge.
3. Section 1252(b)(9) did not bar the district court from hearing Petitioner's habeas challenge to detention.
4. The Government could not detain Petitioner under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1) because she was not subject to expedited removal proceedings, had not been designated an arriving alien, and had not been determined inadmissible under either of the qualifying grounds identified in § 1225(b)(1)(A).
5. Because § 1225(b)(1) was inapplicable, Petitioner's detention fell under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which entitled her to a bond hearing.
6. Petitioner was not entitled to attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act because such fees are unavailable in a habeas corpus proceeding of this type.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(g), 1225(b)(4), or 1252(b)(9) deprived the district court of jurisdiction over Petitioner's § 2241 challenge to her immigration detention.
2. Whether the Government could subject Petitioner to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1) based on her 2021 entry and later detention, despite her continued presence in the United States, release under § 1226, lack of a qualifying determination of inadmissibility, and placement in full rather than expedited removal proceedings.
3. Whether Petitioner's detention instead fell under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), thereby entitling her to a bond hearing.
4. Whether Petitioner was entitled to attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

Disposition

writ_granted