Alkan v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) et al

1
25-cv-0672-BJC-DDL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ABDULLAH OMER ALKAN,
Petitioner,
v.
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT, et, al.,
Respondents.
Case No.: 26-cv-0672-BJC-DDL
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Petitioner Abdulla Omer Alkan, a Turkish national, entered the United States on
April 23, 2023, and was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). ECF
No. 5 at 2. 	He was released on parole and pursued an asylum claim. 	Id. 	At his annual
check-in with ICE on October 14 or 15, 2025, he was detained. Id. He was never told why
he was being detained, but he was given a paper in English that he did not understand. Id.
at 3.
On February 3, 2026, Petitioner, appearing pro se, filed a Petition for a Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 	ECF No. 1. 	This Court set a briefing
schedule, issued a limited stay, and conditionally appointed Federal Defenders to represent
Petitioner on February 5, 2026. ECF No. 5. Petitioner, through counsel, filed an amended
Case 3:26-cv-00672-BJC-DDL Document 9 Filed 02/27/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 3

2
25-cv-0672-BJC-DDL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
petition. ECF No. 5. Respondents filed a return to the amended petition on February 24,
2026. ECF No. 7. On February 25, 2026, Petitioner filed a traverse. ECF No. 8.
LEGAL STANDARD
Courts may grant habeas corpus relief to those “in custody in violation of the
Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241; see also Hamdi v.
Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 525, 124 S. Ct. 2633, 2644, 159 L. Ed. 2d 578 (2004) (“[T]he writ
of habeas corpus remains available to every individual detained within the United States.”).
Courts are authorized to grant writs pursuant to § 2241 to noncitizens in custody in
violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States. 	Magana-Pizano v.
I.N.S., 200 F.3d 603, 609 (9th Cir. 1999).
DISCUSSION
Petitioner contends the revocation of his parole and his detention violate the
Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”) and Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
ECF No. 5 at 3-9. Respondents contend Petitioner “is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a)
and is entitled to an order from this Court directing a bond hearing be held pursuant to 8
U.S.C. § 1226(a),” pursuant to the judgment in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-
CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3713987, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025). ECF No. 7 at
2.
Under applicable regulations, parole is “terminated upon written notice to the
[noncitizen].” 8 C.F.R. § 212.5(e)(2). Additionally, Petitioner was entitled to due process,
including written notice, the reasons for the termination, and an opportunity to contest the
determination, prior to termination of his parole. Noori v. LaRose, No. 25-CV-1824-GPC-
MSB, 2025 WL 2800149, at *11 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2025). 	Petitioner contends, and
Respondents do not dispute, that Petitioner was provided no individualized determination,
and no opportunity to be heard before he was detained. 	The Court finds Petitioner’s
revocation of his release and detention violates due process rights.
Accordingly, 	the 	Court 	GRANTS 	the 	petition 	for 	a 	writ 	of 	habeas 	corpus.
Respondents 	shall 	immediately 	release 	Petitioner 	under 	the 	previously 	determined
Case 3:26-cv-00672-BJC-DDL Document 9 Filed 02/27/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 3

3
25-cv-0672-BJC-DDL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
conditions. Respondents are enjoined from re-detaining Petitioner without complying with
8 C.F.R. § 212.5 and due process. The Clerk of Court shall close this matter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 27, 2026
Case 3:26-cv-00672-BJC-DDL Document 9 Filed 02/27/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
3 of 3