Automated Summary
Key Facts
Petitioner Brayan Anduaga-Colin, a Mexican citizen who entered the United States illegally around 2004, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his immigration detention. He was detained by ICE on September 2, 2024, following release from state-court custody. An immigration judge granted his application for deferral of removal on January 7, 2025, making the removal period administratively final on February 6, 2025. The petitioner has now been detained for 13 months. The Court finds that the detention has become unreasonably indefinite under the Zadvydas v. Davis framework, as removal is not reasonably foreseeable and respondents have failed to demonstrate any significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. The Court grants the petition and orders respondents to release the petitioner by October 24, 2025, subject to appropriate supervision.
Issues
- Whether petitioner's continued detention by immigration authorities is proper under the Zadvydas framework, which requires that detention not exceed the period reasonably necessary to secure removal
- Whether the government has demonstrated that there is a significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, given that petitioner cannot be removed to Mexico and no third country has been identified
Holdings
The Court grants the petition for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and orders respondents to release petitioner from custody by October 24, 2025, subject to an appropriate order of supervision.
Remedies
The court granted the petitioner's habeas corpus petition and ordered respondents to release the petitioner from custody by October 24, 2025, subject to an appropriate order of supervision. Respondents must also provide notice to the Court when release is effected.
Legal Principles
The court applies the Zadvydas v. Davis framework for determining when immigration detention becomes unreasonably indefinite. The Supreme Court established a presumptively reasonable detention period of six months after which the Government must demonstrate that removal is reasonably foreseeable. Once removal is no longer reasonably foreseeable, continued detention is no longer authorized by statute. The Government bears the burden to rebut the petitioner's showing that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.
Precedent Name
- Demore v. Kim
- Anyimu v. Department of Homeland Security
- Vargas v. Noem
- Kaliku v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Zadvydas v. Davis
Cited Statute
- 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1)(A)
- 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3)
- 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2), (6)
- 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Judge Name
John W. Lungstrum
Passage Text
- The Court finds that petitioner has met his burden to provide good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future in his case.
- After this 6-month period, once the alien provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing.
- Petitioner's detention has become unreasonably indefinite, and the Court therefore concludes that petitioner must be released. That release may be subject to appropriate terms of supervision.