Camarena-Ortiz v. Moniz et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
JHONATHAN JAVIER CAMARENA-
ORTIZ,
Petitioner,
*
*
*
*
*
Civil Action No. 1:26-cv-11245-IT	v. 	*
*
ANTONE MONIZ, et al.,
Respondents.
*
*
*
*
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
March 19, 2026
TALWANI, D.J.
Petitioner Jhonathan Javier Camarena-Ortiz is a citizen of the Dominican Republic who
has been detained by ICE since March 12, 2026. Pet. ¶¶ 2, 4 [Doc. No. 1]. Petitioner is currently
detained either at the ICE Field Office, in Burlington, Massachusetts, or at Plymouth County
Correctional Facility, in Plymouth, Massachusetts. Id. ¶ 10. On March 12, 2026, Petitioner filed
his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 1]. Petitioner contends that, if authorized at all,
his detention “must be compliant with INA § 236(a),” id. ¶ 29, and that “he is entitled to [a] bond
hearing in immigration court,” Pet.’s Reply ¶ 6 [Doc. No. 9].
Respondents state “that the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those
addressed by this Court in Doe v. Moniz[, 800 F. Supp. 3d 203 (D. Mass. 2025)].” Resp. to
Habeas Pet. 1 [Doc. No. 8]. Respondents further note that “[s]hould the Court follow its
reasoning in Doe v. Moniz . . . it would reach the same result here.” Id.
The court finds the reasoning in Doe remains correct. Nothing in the record indicates that
Petitioner was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b) rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). The Board of
Case 1:26-cv-11245-IT Document 10 Filed 03/19/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Immigration Appeals’ decision in Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I. & N. Dec. 216 (B.I.A. 2025),
is unpersuasive and does not change the analysis. See Elias Escobar v. Hyde, No. 1:25-cv-12620-
IT, 2025 WL 2823324, at *3 (D. Mass. Oct. 3, 2025) (citing cases reaching same conclusion).
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 1] is therefore GRANTED as follows.
No later than March 26, 2026, Petitioner must be provided a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(a) or, if the immigration judge declines to conduct a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(a), Respondents shall so advise the court by that date so that this court may conduct the
bond hearing. Any decision by the immigration judge to retain Petitioner in custody following a
bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) shall set forth the reasons for the continued
detention. Following the bond hearing, Respondents shall promptly file a status report.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
March 19, 2026 	/s/ Indira Talwani
United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-11245-IT Document 10 Filed 03/19/26 Page 2 of 2