1:25-cv-13439•De Araujo v. Noem et al
Texte intégral
United States District Court
District of Massachusetts
Wilson Adao de Araujo,
Petitioner,
v.
Kr i sti Noem, et al.,
Respondents .
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No .
25-13439-NMG
---------------------
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
GORTON, J.
Wilson Adao de Araujo ("petitioner " or " de Araujo " ) f i led
this petition for writ of habeas corpus , alleging that Kristi
Noem and other named respondents (collectively , " respondents " )
have wrongfully detained him without a bond hearing pursuant to
8 U. S . C . §1225(b) (2). He claims he is entit l ed to a bond
hearing under 8 U. S . C . §1226 . Respondents rejoin that
petitioner is lawfully detained under 8 U. S . C . §123l(a) (5) . For
the reasons that follow , petitioner ' s motion will be DENIED.
I. Facts
The accounts of petitioner ' s immigration history proffered
by the parties are inconsistent . Both agree that petitioner is
a native of Brazil and was apprehended by U. S . Border Patrol
- 1 -
Case 1:25-cv-13439-NMG Document 9 Filed 12/23/25 Page 1 of 4:
("USBP") shortly after unlawfully entering the United States at
the southern border in January , 2023 . That is the extent of the
immigration history provided in de Araujo ' s petition .
The government declares that de Ara u jo did not include all
relevant history in his petition and that the 2023 i mm igration
was not his first unlawful entry into the United States .
According to the government , in 20 1 4 , petitioner applied for
admission at Miami International Airport. He did not possess a
val id entry document aBd expressed no fear of being returned to
Brazil .
U. S . Customs and Border Protection (" CBP " ) determined that
he was inadmissible pursuant to 8 U. S . C. §1182(a) ( 7) (A) (i) (I)
and removed him from the United States pu r suant to 8 U. S . C .
§1225 ( b) (1) . Petitioner was notified that he was prohibited
from seeking entry into the United States for five years and
that after five years , should he seek to return to the U. S ., he
must request and obtain permission from the Secretary of
Homeland Security .
that process .
Petitioner wa s given an alien number du r ing
According to the government , when USBP apprehended
petitioner in January , 2023 , it was unaware of his prior
deportation and issued him a second alien number . He was given
a Notice to Appear , which was filed in the Boston Immigration
Court in March , 2023 .
- 2 -
Case 1:25-cv-13439-NMG Document 9 Filed 12/23/25 Page 2 of 4In November , 2025 , ICE again arrested petitioner after determining that he was incorrectly issued a second alien number and served with the Notice to Appear . He was then served with a Form I - 871 , Notice of Intent/Decision to Reinstate Prior Order [of Removal] under his first alien number pursuant to 8 U.S.C . §1231 (a) (5) . II. Legal Standard Non - citizens who unlawfully reenter the country after previously being removed are subject to expedited removal pursuant to 8 U. S.C . §1231 (a) (5) . The prior order of removal is reinstated as of its original date and may not be reopened or reviewed . G. P . v . Garland , 103 F.4th 898 , 900 (1st Cir . 2024) The government must effectuate that removal within 90 days , during which time the non - citizen ' s detention is mandatory. Detention may be extended beyond 90 days in certain circumstances . 8 U.S . C . §123l(a) (6) entitled to a bond hearing . The detainee is not While 8 U.S . C. §123l(a) (5) applies to non-citizens who have already received a deportation order , 8 U. S.C . §1226 governs the arrest and detention of non - citizens pending a decision on removal. The government may detain an alien , release him on bond or release him on conditional parole , and the alien may request a bond hearing by an immigration judge at any point before a final order of removal is issued . - 3 - Case 1:25-cv-13439-NMG Document 9 Filed 12/23/25 Page 3 of 4
.. III. Analysis Upon consideration of the additional details of petitioner's immigration history provided by the government , it is clear to the Court that petitioner is being lawfully detained under 8 U. S . C . §123l(a) (5) and is not entitled to a bond hearing . The 90 - day removal period has not expired , and even if it had , the government could continue to detain petitioner if appropriate under 8 U.S . C. §123l(a) (6) . The Court declines to address petitioner ' s constitutional and statutory arguments which are premised on the incorrect assumption that petitioner is subject to 8 U. S . C . §1226 . ORDER For the foregoing reasons , de Araujo ' s petition for writ of habeas corpus (Docket No. 1) is DENIED. So ordered. Nathaniel M. Gort ~ Senior United States District Judge Dated: December 23 , 2025 - 4 - Case 1:25-cv-13439-NMG Document 9 Filed 12/23/25 Page 4 of 4
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.