Sieng Kim Khim v. Pamela Bondi, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington granted Sieng Kim Khim’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his prolonged immigration detention. The court ordered his immediate release under his prior conditions of supervision and prohibited re-detention without notice and an opportunity to be heard before an immigration judge. The court also enjoined removal to a third country without meaningful proceedings and removal to any country where Khim would likely face imprisonment or other punishment.

Holdings

1. Khim's continued immigration detention was unreasonable and no longer authorized by the INA because he had been detained far longer than the presumptively reasonable six-month period and the government failed to show a significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.
2. The informal procedures used to re-detain Khim complied with 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(i)(3) but did not provide the process required by the Fifth Amendment because they afforded no meaningful hearing before a neutral decisionmaker.
3. Before removing or attempting to remove Khim to a country other than Cambodia, the government must provide notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard in reopened removal proceedings before an immigration judge.
4. The government may not remove Khim to a country where he is likely to face imprisonment or other punishment upon arrival when the removal is undertaken with punitive intent.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Khim's continued detention after a final order of removal was unreasonable and unauthorized under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) and Zadvydas v. Davis.
2. Whether the procedures used to revoke Khim's release and re-detain him satisfied the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
3. Whether Khim was entitled to an injunction requiring notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard in reopened removal proceedings before removal to a third country.
4. Whether removal to a country where Khim had no connection and was likely to face imprisonment or other punishment would constitute punitive deportation prohibited by due process.

Disposition

writ_granted