Alayande v. Robert Lacy, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
ADEDOJA ALAYANDE,
Petitioner,
versus
ROBERT LACY, JR,
Respondent.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:26-cv-00373
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
OPINION AND ORDER ON DISMISSAL
The motion for summary judgment by Respondent
Robert Lacy, Jr., is granted. Dkt 7.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus by Petitioner
Adedoja Alayande is denied. Dkt 1.
1. Background
Petitioner is a citizen of Nigeria who was admitted to
the United States as a non-immigrant in 2018. Dkt 7 at 2.
She proceeds here pro se.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement in February
2020 issued Petitioner a notice to appear, alleging she had
overstayed her non-immigrant visitor visa. Dkt 7-1.
Petitioner was later arrested in Texas on charges of injury
to a child and burglary of a habitation in June 2025. Dkt 7-
2 at 17. ICE lodged a detainer against her, and she was
transferred to ICE custody on September 30, 2025. Dkt 1
at 1.
Petitioner was given a bond hearing on November 6,
2025. The Immigration Judge determined that she posed a
danger to persons and property based on her arrest and
subsequent criminal charges. The IJ denied Petitioner
release on bond on that basis. Dkt 7-3 at 2.
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
February 13, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:26-cv-00373 Document 8 Filed 02/09/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 4

The IJ held a second bond hearing on December 8,
2025. Release on bond was again denied because the IJ
found no change in circumstances that would warrant a
different decision about release. Dkt 7-4 at 2. Petitioner
remains in custody at the Houston Processing Center.
Dkt 1 at 1.
In January 2026, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus to challenge her continued detention. Id at
2–3. She alleges that her detention violates the Due
Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment because it is
“unsupported by any individualized finding that she poses
a danger to the community or [is] a flight risk.” Id at 3. She
disputes the facts underlying her criminal charges and
asserts that the Government didn’t present evidence to
justify her continued detention. Ibid.
Respondent filed a motion for summary judgment in
response. Dkt 7. He asserts that Petitioner’s detention is
governed by 8 USC §1226(a), which provides for a bond
hearing upon request. He also observes that Petitioner has
had two bond hearings, at which the IJ denied her request
for release. Respondent filed documents from those
proceedings in support of his motion. Dkts 7-1, 7-2, 7-3 &
7-4.
Petitioner didn’t respond to the motion, and her time to
do so has expired.
2. Legal standard
Petitioner’s petition is construed liberally because she
proceeds pro se. Coleman v United States, 912 F3d 824, 828
(5th Cir 2019), citing Erickson v Pardus, 551 US 89, 94
(2007, per curiam).
Respondent’s motion for summary judgment is
governed by Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. Rule 56(a) provides that summary judgment is
appropriate when the pleadings and evidence on file show
that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact and
that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter
of law. See also Trent v Wade, 776 F3d 368, 376 (5th Cir
2015). The Supreme Court holds that “the substantive law
Case 4:26-cv-00373 Document 8 Filed 02/09/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 4

will identify which facts are material.” Anderson v Liberty
Lobby, Inc, 477 US 242, 248 (1986); see also Nola Spice
Designs LLC v Haydel Enterprises, Inc, 783 F3d 527, 536
(5th Cir 2015).
3. Discussion
The question of jurisdiction must be addressed before
the merits of Petitioner’s claims. See Florida v Thomas,
532 US 774, 777 (2001). “Federal courts are courts of
limited jurisdiction, and absent jurisdiction conferred by
statute, lack the power to adjudicate claims.” Stockman v
Federal Election Commission, 138 F3d 144, 151 (5th Cir
1998).
Respondent asserts that Petitioner is subject to
detention under 8 USC §1226(a). Congress provides in
§1226(e) that:
The Attorney General’s discretionary
judgment regarding the application of
[§1226] shall not be subject to review. No
court may set aside any action or decision
by the Attorney General under this section
regarding the detention or release of any
alien or the grant, revocation, or denial of
bond or parole.
District courts therefore don’t have jurisdiction to review
discretionary decisions made by an IJ regarding bond. See
Nielsen v Preap, 586 U.S. 392, 401 (2019).
Petitioner contends that the IJ’s decisions to deny her
release on bond weren’t supported by sufficient evidence
and were thus arbitrary. But review of the merits of those
decisions and the factual basis underlying them is barred
by §1226(e). Jurisdiction to consider these claims doesn’t
exist.
It bears mention that §1226(e) “does not deprive
[courts] of all authority to review statutory or
constitutional challenges. [Courts] retain jurisdiction to
Case 4:26-cv-00373 Document 8 Filed 02/09/26 in TXSD Page 3 of 4

review [a non-citizen’s] detention insofar as that detention
presents constitutional issues.” Oyelude v Chertoff, 125 F
Appx 543, 546 (5th Cir 2005), citing Demore v Kim, 538 US
510, 516–17 (2003). Pertinent here, the Supreme Court has
stated, “Detention during removal proceedings is a
constitutionally permissible part of that process.” Demore,
538 US at 531 (citation omitted). As such, the Government
may constitutionally detain deportable aliens during the
limited period necessary for their removal proceedings.” Id
at 526.
The record shows that Petitioner has been provided
with all the process that she is due under §1226. She offers
no evidence to the contrary. Her detention thus doesn’t
violate due process.
4. Conclusion
The motion by Respondent for summary judgment is
GRANTED. Dkt. 7.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus by Petitioner
Adedoja Alayande is DENIED. Dkt 1.
This action is DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on , at Houston, Texas.
__________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
February 09, 2026
Case 4:26-cv-00373 Document 8 Filed 02/09/26 in TXSD Page 4 of 4