Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Asbel A.,
Petitioner,
v.
Pamela Jo Bondi, in her official capacity as
Attorney General of the United States; Kristi
Noem, in her official capacity as Secretary
of the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security; Todd Lyons, in his official capacity
as Acting Director of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; and David
Easterwood, in his official capacity as
Acting Director, St. Paul Field Office,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
Respondents.
File No. 26-cv-189 (ECT/DJF)
OPINION AND ORDER
Graham Ojala-Barbour, Ojala-Barbour Law Firm, PLLC, St. Paul, MN, for Petitioner
Asbel A.
Ana H. Voss and Justin Merak Page, United States Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN,
for Respondents Pamela Bondi, Kristi Noem, Todd M. Lyons, and David Easterwood.
Petitioner Asbel A. is a Nicaraguan citizen who has resided in the United States
since June 21, 2021. Pet. ¶¶ 3, 46–47. After an immigration judge denied Asbel’s asylum
petition, Asbel “timely filed an appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals (‘BIA’),”
which “has been pending with the BIA since June 11, 2025.” 	Id. ¶ 3. 	Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) detained Asbel on January 12, 2026. Id. ¶ 1. He is currently
CASE 0:26-cv-00189-ECT-DJF Doc. 7 Filed 01/16/26 Page 1 of 4

2
in ICE custody at Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 	Id. 	Asbel “has not been charged with any
crime or arrested for any crime.” Id. ¶ 5.
Here, Asbel challenges his detention under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Pet. ¶11. He claims
he has been wrongly classified as a § 1225(b)(2) detainee (whose detention is mandatory)
rather than a § 1226 detainee (whose detention is discretionary and who is entitled to a
bond hearing). Pet. ¶¶ 1, 7–9, 26–45; see Jose J.O.E. v. Bondi, 797 F. Supp. 3d 957, 961–
62 	(D. Minn. 	2025) 	(explaining 	legal 	framework). 	According 	to 	Asbel, 	that
misclassification and denial of a bond hearing violate his right to due process under the
Fifth Amendment, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(b)(2) and 1226(a), and § 1226’s implementing
regulations. 	See Pet. ¶¶ 50–68. 	He seeks a declaration that his detention absent a bond
hearing is unlawful; issuance of a writ of habeas corpus ordering Respondents to release
him from custody or set a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a); and an order
enjoining his removal or transfer out of the District of Minnesota during the pendency of
this case. Pet. at 17–18.
In a one-paragraph response, Respondents state that Asbel’s petition “raises legal
and factual issues similar to those in prior habeas petitions this Court has decided,” and
argues that the petition fails on the merits for the same reasons set forth in the appeal of
Avila v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-3248 (8th Cir. Docketed Nov. 10, 2025). 	See ECF No. 6 at 1.
This raises an issue of statutory interpretation1 that courts in this District have repeatedly
considered and rejected, and it will be rejected here as well.
1 	To the extent Respondents challenge this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction to
consider Asbel’s petition by way of their response in Avila, consistent with previous rulings
on this issue, I find that the jurisdiction-stripping provisions of § 1252(a)(5), (b)(9), and
CASE 0:26-cv-00189-ECT-DJF Doc. 7 Filed 01/16/26 Page 2 of 4

3
Asbel has shown he has been misclassified under § 1225(b)(2) rather than § 1226.
As courts have explained, the former statute applies to applicants “seeking admission,” and
the latter to “aliens already in the country.” 	8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A); Jennings v.
Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 289 (2018) (construing 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and (c)); see
Francisco T. v. Bondi, 797 F. Supp. 3d 970, 974–76 (D. Minn. 2025); Belsai D.S. v. Bondi,
--- F. Supp. 3d ---, No. 25-cv-3682 (KMM/EMB), 2025 WL 2802947, at *6–7 (D. Minn.
Oct. 1, 2025); Eliseo A.A. v. Olson, --- F. Supp. 3d ---, No. 25-cv-3381 (JWB/DJF), 2025
WL 2886729, at *2–4 (D. Minn. Oct. 8, 2025); Avila v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-3741 (JRT/SGE),
2025 WL 2976539, at *5–7 (D. Minn. Oct. 21, 2025), appeal filed, No. 25-3248 (8th Cir.
Nov. 10, 2025); Andres R.E. v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-3946 (NEB/DLM), 2025 WL 3146312,
at *2–3 (D. Minn. Nov. 4, 2025); E.M. v. Noem, 25-cv-3975 (SRN/DTS), 2025 WL
3157839, at *4–8 (D. Minn. Nov. 12, 2025); Santos M.C. v. Olson, No. 25-cv-4264
(PJS/DJF), 2025 WL 3281787, at *2–3 (D. Minn. Nov. 25, 2025). As of this writing, only
one federal court of appeals has ruled on the question, and it reached the same conclusion.
See Castañon-Nava v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 161 F.4th 1048, (7th Cir. 2025). Asbel
has lived in the United States for more than four years. His detention falls under § 1226
and not § 1225(b)(2).
(g) do not apply to “the narrow question whether a noncitizen is subject to discretionary
detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 or mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2).” Fernando
F.P.D. v. Brott, No. 25-cv-4455 (ECT/ECW), 2025 WL 3675151, at *2 (D. Minn. Dec. 17,
2025) (citing cases).
CASE 0:26-cv-00189-ECT-DJF Doc. 7 Filed 01/16/26 Page 3 of 4

4
For these reasons, Asbel is subject to discretionary detention and entitled to a bond
hearing.2
ORDER
Therefore, based on the foregoing, and on all the files, records, and proceedings
herein, IT IS ORDERED THAT Petitioner Asbel A.’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
[ECF No. 1] is GRANTED as follows:
1. 	The Court DECLARES that Petitioner is not subject to mandatory detention
under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2), and is instead subject to detention, if at all, pursuant to the
discretionary provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1226.
2. 	Respondents are ENJOINED from denying Petitioner a bond hearing on the
basis that 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) applies to Petitioner, and Respondents shall provide
Petitioner with a bond hearing in accordance with 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a)(2)(A).
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: January 16, 2026 	s/ Eric C. Tostrud
Eric C. Tostrud
United States District Court
2 	Though Asbel alternatively requests release, see Pet. at 18, that will not be granted.
Asbel’s regulatory arguments will not be addressed.
CASE 0:26-cv-00189-ECT-DJF Doc. 7 Filed 01/16/26 Page 4 of 4