0:26-cv-02242•Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable
Gesamter Gesetzestext
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA HECTOR J.A.S., Petitioner, v. RYAN SHEA, Sheriff, Freeborn County, MN; DAVID EASTERWOOD, Acting Director, St. Paul Field Office Immigration and Customs Enforcement; MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; TODD BLANCHE, Attorney General, Respondents. Civil No. 26-2242 (JRT/DLM) ORDER Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner’s Motion for Order to Show Cause (Docket No. [2]) is GRANTED IN PART as follows: a. If Petitioner is being detained in Minnesota, Respondents are ENJOINED from removing, transferring, or otherwise facilitating the removal of CASE 0:26-cv-02242-JRT-DLM Doc. 5 Filed 04/14/26 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - Petitioner from the District of Minnesota until the Court issues an order on the pending Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. [1]). i. Respondents may request permission from the Court to move Petitioner if unforeseen or emergency circumstances arise which require Petitioner to be removed from the District. Any such request must include an explanation for the request as well as a proposed destination. The Court will then determine whether to grant the request and permit transfer of Petitioner. ii. If Petitioner has already been removed from Minnesota, Respondents are ORDERED to immediately return Petitioner to Minnesota. b. Respondents are directed to file an answer to the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Petitioner by no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 16, 2026, certifying the true cause and proper duration of Petitioner’s confinement and showing cause why the writ should not be granted in this case. c. Respondents’ answer must include: i. Such affidavits and exhibits as are needed to establish the lawfulness and correct duration of Petitioner’s detention in light of the issues raised in the habeas petition; CASE 0:26-cv-02242-JRT-DLM Doc. 5 Filed 04/14/26 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - ii. A reasoned memorandum of law and fact explaining Respondents’ legal position on Petitioner’s claims, including whether Petitioner’s detention violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment; iii. Respondents’ recommendation on whether an evidentiary hearing should be conducted; d. If Petitioner intends to file a reply to Respondents’ answer, they must do so by no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 17, 2026. Thereafter, no further submissions from either party will be permitted, except as authorized by Court order. 2. Petitioner’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED. DATED: April 14, 2026 _____/s/ John R. Tunheim_____ at Minneapolis, Minnesota. JOHN R. TUNHEIM United States District Judge CASE 0:26-cv-02242-JRT-DLM Doc. 5 Filed 04/14/26 Page 3 of 3
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.