Serna Serna v. Noem et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
JOSE LUIS SERNA SERNA §
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Petitioner,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-26-0090
KRISTI NOEM, et al.,
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Jose Luis Serna Serna {"Petitionern), a citizen of Mexico, has
been living in the United States since 1993. 1 On October 31, 2025,
Petitioner was taken into immigration custody by Immigration and
Customs Enforcement ("ICE") under § 1225 (b) {2) .2 He remains in
immigration custody.
Pending before the court is Petitioner's Habeas Petition
{Docket Entry No. 1). Petitioner asserts that his detention
without a bond hearing violates {1) the Immigration and Nationality
Act and {2) due process. 3
Also pending before the court is the Respondents' Response to
the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for Summary
1Petition for
Docket Entry No. 1,
Petition, Docket
identification, all
at the top of the
System.
Writ of Habeas Corpus ( "Habeas Petition"),
p. 3 1 5; Notice to Appear, Exhibit 2 to Habeas
Entry No. 1-2, p. 2. For purposes of
page numbers refer to the pagination imprinted
page by the court's Electronic Case ling
2Habeas Petition, Docket Entry No. 1, p. 3 i 5
3Id. at 16-18.
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
April 09, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:26-cv-00090 Document 14 Filed 04/09/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 4

Judgement ("Respondents' MSJ") (Docket Entry No. 12). Respondents
argue that Petitioner can legally be detained under§ 1225(b)(2) as
an applicant for admission.4 Petitioner has led a reply. 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
arrest. Id. at 498, 508. The Fifth Circuit's analysis and holding
applies in this case. Petitioner argues that the court is not
bound by Buenrostro-Mendez because the Central District of
California vacated Matter of Yajure Hurtado in Bautista v.
Santacruz, Case No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2026 WL 468284 (C.D.
Cal. Feb. 18, 2026).6 However, the Central District of
California's vacatur of Matter of Yajure Hurtado has no effect on
Buenrostro-Mendez because the Fifth Circuit's decision is based on
its interpretation of the text of§ 1225 and§ 1226. Buenrostro
Mendez, 166 F.4th at 498 ("The statutory interpretation issue posed
by these alien petitioners is novel but not recondite."). The
court is therefore bound by the Fifth Circuit's holding that §
4 Respondents' MSJ, Docket Entry No. 13, p. 1.
5Petitioner's Reply in Support of Habeas Petition and
Opposition to Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment
("Petitioner's Reply"), Docket Entry No. 13.
6Petitioner's Reply, Docket Entry No. 6, p. 2.
-2-
Case 4:26-cv-00090 Document 14 Filed 04/09/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 4

1225(b)(2) applies to aliens who were already present in the United
States at the time of their arrest.7
Petitioner also argues that his detention without a bond
hearing violates due process.8 However, as explained in Garcia De
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.'" Id. at *2 (quoting Demore v.
Kirn, 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' Response to the
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for Summary Judgment
(Docket Entry No. 12) is GRANTED and Petitioner's Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus (Docket Entry No. 1) is DENIED.
7 Petitioner also argues that because he is a member of a
nationwide class under Bautista v. Santacruz, Case No. 5:25-CV-
01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3288403 (C.D. Cal. Nov, 25, 2025), he cannot
be legally detained under§ 1225(b)(2). Petitioner's Reply, Docket
Entry No. 13, pp. 5-7. However, the court declines to enforce the
Central District of California's holding in Bautista, as it does
not control in light of Buenrostro-Mendez.
8 Habeas Petition, Docket Entry No. 1, pp. 17-18.
-3-
Case 4:26-cv-00090 Document 14 Filed 04/09/26 in TXSD Page 3 of 4

The court will enter a final judgment in favor of Respondents.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this 9th day of April, 2026.
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-4-
Case 4:26-cv-00090 Document 14 Filed 04/09/26 in TXSD Page 4 of 4