Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Maria C.Y., 	Case No. 26-cv-117 (MJD/DTS)
Petitioner,
v. 	REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Todd Lyons, et al.,
Respondents.
INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Maria C.Y. is an Ecuadorian citizen who has resided in the United States
since April 2021. Pet. 11, Dkt. No. 1. In April 2021, Maria entered the United States
without inspection, was placed in removal proceedings, and subsequently submitted an
application for asylum. Id. at 12. Her application for asylum remains pending. Id. Maria
C.Y. was detained on January 7, 2026, and remains in immigration detention at this time.
Id.
Maria C.Y. challenges her detention under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Id. at 3. She claims
that the Government has unlawfully detained her pursuant to § 1225(b)(2) (a mandatory
detention statute) rather than § 1226 (a discretionary detention statute). Id. at 2–3.
Immigrants detained under § 1226 are entitled to a bond hearing. See, e.g., Jose J.O.E.
v. Bondi, 797 F. Supp. 3d 957, 961–62 (D. Minn. 2025) (explaining the legal framework).
Maria C.Y. contends the Government’s misclassification of her as a § 1225(b)(2) detainee
violates the Immigration and Nationality Act and her right to due process under the Fifth
Amendment. Id. at 15–16. She seeks a writ of habeas corpus requiring the Government
CASE 0:26-cv-00117-MJD-DTS Doc. 6 Filed 01/21/26 Page 1 of 3

2
to immediately release her or provide a bond hearing under § 1226(a) within seven days.
Id. at 16.
The Government disagrees, arguing that § 1225(b)(2), not § 1226, governs
Maria C.Y.’s detention. Gov.’s Resp. 1, Dkt. No. 5. This raises an issue of statutory
interpretation that this Court and others in this District have repeatedly considered and
rejected. Francisco T. v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-3219, 2025 WL 3490809 (D. Minn. Sept. 5,
2025) R. & R. adopted by 2025 WL 3236513 (D. Minn. Nov. 19, 2025); see also, e.g.,
Misael T. v. Bondi, No. 26-cv-263, 2026 WL 146510, at *2 (D. Minn. Jan. 20, 2026)
(collecting cases); Andres R.E. v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-3946, 2025 WL 3146312 (D. Minn.
Nov. 4, 2025). The Government concedes as much, acknowledging that “[t]his petition
raises legal and factual issues similar to those in prior habeas petitions this Court has
decided.” Gov.’s Resp. 1. Rather than restating its analysis here, the Court incorporates
its prior analysis by reference. See Francisco T., 2025 WL 3490809, at *3–11, R. & R.
adopted by 2025 WL 3236513. Because § 1226(a)’s discretionary detention framework,
not 	§ 	1225’s 	mandatory 	detention 	framework, 	applies 	to 	Maria 	C.Y., 	the 	Court
recommends granting the petition.1
RECOMMENDATION
For the reasons set forth above, the Court RECOMMENDS THAT:
1. 	Maria C.Y.’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. No. 1) be GRANTED;
2. 	The Government be ordered to issue an administrative warrant and provide
Maria C.Y. with a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226 within seven days;
1 Resolving this question in Maria C.Y.’s favor makes it unnecessary to address the
Petition’s alternative grounds.
CASE 0:26-cv-00117-MJD-DTS Doc. 6 Filed 01/21/26 Page 2 of 3

3
3. 	The Government be ordered to release Maria C.Y. if it fails to issue an
administrative warrant and provide Maria C.Y. with a bond hearing; and
4. 	The Government be enjoined from denying Maria C.Y. a bond hearing on
the basis that § 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) applies to her.
Dated: January 21, 2026 	__s/ David T. Schultz___________
DAVID T. SCHULTZ
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE
Filing Objections: This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the
District Court. It is not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Under Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), “a party may file and serve specific written objections to a
magistrate judge’s proposed finding and recommendations within 2 days after being
served a copy” of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to those
objections within 2 days after being served a copy of the objections. LR 72.2(b)(2). All
objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set for in LR 72.2(c).
CASE 0:26-cv-00117-MJD-DTS Doc. 6 Filed 01/21/26 Page 3 of 3