Parlar v. Raycraft et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
______
BEDIR A. PARLAR,
Petitioner,
v.
KEVIN RAYCRAFT et al.,
Respondents.
____________________________/
Case No. 1:26-cv-1654
Honorable Jane M. Beckering
OPINION
Petitioner, a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainee currently
detained at the North Lake Processing Center located in Baldwin, Lake County, Michigan, initiated
this action by filing a counseled petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
(Pet., ECF No. 1.) For the following reasons, the Court will conditionally grant Petitioner’s petition
for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Discussion
I. 	Procedural History
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, he challenges the constitutionality of his current detention
following an order issued by the Detroit Immigration Court denying him bond, and asks the Court
to, inter alia, issue a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 ordering Respondents to
release Petitioner. (Pet., ECF No. 1, PageID.24.) In an Order entered on May 22, 2026, the Court
directed Respondents to show cause, within three business days, why the writ of habeas corpus
should not be granted. (Order, ECF No. 3.) Respondents filed their response and a recording of the
April 13, 2026, bond hearing on May 27, 2026, (Resp., ECF No. 4; Recording of Apr. 13, 2026,
Case 1:26-cv-01654-JMB-SJB ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 06/15/26 Page 1
of 3

2
Bond Hearing, filed on May 27, 2026), and Petitioner filed his reply on June 2, 2026, (ECF No.
5).
II. 	Factual Background
Petitioner entered the United States in June 2022 through the J1 visitor visa program and
remained in the United States after the 4-month visa expired. (Recording of Apr. 13, 2026, Bond
Hearing, at 1:40–2:00, filed on May 27, 2026.) On an unknown date, ICE agents arrested
Petitioner. (See Pet., ECF No. 1.)
On April 13, 2026, Petitioner received a bond hearing pursuant to § 1226(a). (Bond Order,
ECF No. 4-2, PageID.56.). In a written order, an immigration judge (IJ) with the Detroit
Immigration Court denied Petitioner’s bond request. (Bond Order, ECF No. 4-2, PageID.56.) In
the written order, the IJ concluded that Petitioner “failed to meet his burden of demonstrating
[Petitioner] is not a flight risk.” (Id.)
III. 	Analysis
Respondents argue that the Court should deny Petitioner’s § 2241 petition due to a lack of
jurisdiction and Petitioner’s failure to exhaust Petitioner’s administrative remedies, as well as on
the merits. The Court has fully addressed these issues and Respondents’ arguments in Soto-Medina
v. Lynch, 817 F. Supp. 3d 612 (W.D. Mich. 2026). Therefore, for the reasons set forth in Soto-
Medina, the Court will conditionally grant Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
IV. 	Other Claims and Other Forms of Relief
Because the Court will conditionally grant Petitioner’s § 2241 petition as set forth herein,
the Court does not address other claims and other requested relief in Petitioner’s § 2241 petition.
Case 1:26-cv-01654-JMB-SJB ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 06/15/26 Page 2
of 3

3
Conclusion
The Court will order Respondents to provide Petitioner with an individualized bond
hearing before an immigration judge, at which time the government will have the burden to
demonstrate dangerousness or flight risk by clear and convincing evidence, within five business
days and with notice to the Parties as soon as practicable, no later than 24 hours prior to the
scheduled hearing, or, in the alternative, immediately release Petitioner from custody. The Court
will also order Respondents to file a status report within six business days of the date of this Court’s
Opinion and Judgment to certify compliance with this Opinion and the corresponding Judgment.
The status report shall include if and when the bond hearing occurred, if bond was granted or
denied, and if bond was granted, the conditions of the bond, or if bond was denied, the reasons for
the denial.
Dated: 	June 15, 2026 	/s/ Jane M. Beckering
Jane M. Beckering
United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-01654-JMB-SJB ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 06/15/26 Page 3
of 3