Bracho v. Noem et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
BRANDON LEE VIRLA BRACHO,
Petitioner,
v.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-26-0829
KRISTI NOEM, et al.,
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Brandon Lee Virla Bracho ("Petitioner"), a citizen of
Venezuela, entered the United States on August 2, 2021.1 On
January 14, 2026, Petitioner was taken into immigration custody by
Immigration and Customs Enforcement under § 1225 (b) (2).2
Petitioner remains in immigration custody.
Pending before the court is Petitioner's Habeas Petition
(Docket Entry No. 1) and Petitiqner's Emergency Motion for Leave to
File an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Motion to
Amend") (Docket Entry No. 8). In his original petition, Petitioner
argues that his detention without a bond hearing violates the
Immigration and Nationality Act.3 In his motion to amend,
1Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (28 U.S.C. § 2241)
("Habeas Petition"), Docket Entry No. 1, p. 7 ! 13. For purposes
of identification, all page numbers refer to the pagination
imprinted at the top of the page by the court's Electronic Case
Filing system.
2Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and to Show
Cause, Docket Entry No. 9, p. 2 ! 5.
3Habeas Petition, Docket Entry No. 1, p. 7 1 13.
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
April 13, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:26-cv-00829 Document 16 Filed 04/13/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 4

Petitioner argues that his detention also violates due process.4
Plainti has also led an Emergency Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order and to Show Cause (Docket Entry No. 9), a
Supplemental Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Immediate
Adjudication of Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc Entry No. 13) and a
Quick Reply and Notice of Intent to Rest (Docket Entry No. 15).
Also pending before the court is Respondents' Response to the
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for Summary Judgment
("Respondents' MSJ") (Docket Entry No. 7) and Respondents' Response
to Petitioner's Supplemental Motion for Preliminary Injunction and
Immediate Adjudication of Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket Entry No.
14). Respondents argue that Petitioner can legally be detained
under § 1225(b)(2) because he is an applicant for admission.5
As the Fifth Circuit explained in Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi,
166 F.4th 494 (5th Cir. 2026), § 1225(b)(2) applies to aliens who
were already present in the United States at the time of their
4Amended Petition for Writ for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under
28 U.S.C. § 2241, Exhibit 2 to Petitioner's Motion to Amend, Docket
Entry No. 8 , p. 7. A court may deny a motion to amend when the
amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief could be
granted. Stripling v. Jordan Production Co., LLC, 234 F.3d 863,
872-73 (5th Cir. 2000). Because the court has previously held that
the type of detention Pet ioner faces does not violate due
process, Petitioner's amended petition fails to state a claim. His
motion to amend will therefore be denied.
5Respondents' MSJ, Docket Entry No. 7, p. 1; Respondents'
Response to Petitioner's Supplemental Motion for Preliminary
Injunction and Immediate Adjudication of Writ of Habeas Corpus,
Docket Entry No. 14, pp. 1-2.
-2-
Case 4:26-cv-00829 Document 16 Filed 04/13/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 4

arrest. l.fL.. at 498, 508. The Fifth Circuit's analysis and holding
applies in this case.
Pet ioner's detention without a bond hearing does not violate
substantive or procedural due process. As explained in
La Cruz v. Bondi, Civil Action No. H-25-5577, 2026 WL 309939 (S.D.
Tex. Feb. 5, 2026), the Supreme Court has made clear that
"' [d] etention during removal proceedings is a constitutionally
permissible part of that process.'" 1.9..... at *2 (quoting Demore v.
Kim, 123 S. Ct. 1708, 1721-22 (2003)). Moreover, as explained in
Jacobo-Ventura, Civil Action No. H-25-6117 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 19,
2026), because petitioner only has those rights regarding admission
that Congress has provided by statute, and because § 1225(b)(2)
mandates detention of applicants for admission until certain
proceedings have concluded, Petitioner is not entitled to a bond
hearing as a matter of procedural due process.
For the reasons explained above, Respondents' Motion
Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 7) is GRANTED, and Petitioner's
Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (28 U.S.C. § 2241) (Docket Entry
No. 1), Petitioner's Emergency Motion for Leave to File an Amended
Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket Entry No. 8), Emergency
Motion Temporary Restraining Order and to Show Cause (Docket
Entry No. 9), and Petitioner's Supplemental Motion for Preliminary
Injunction and Immediate Adjudication of Writ of Habeas Corpus
(Docket Entry No. 13) are DENIED.
-3-
Case 4:26-cv-00829 Document 16 Filed 04/13/26 in TXSD Page 3 of 4

The court will enter a final judgment in favor of Respondents.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this 13th day of April, 2026.
SIM LAKE
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-4-
Case 4:26-cv-00829 Document 16 Filed 04/13/26 in TXSD Page 4 of 4