Hidalgo Silva v. Thompson et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
OMAR HIDALGO SILVA, §
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Petitioner,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-26-1911
RAYMOND THOMPSON, et al.,
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Omar Hidalgo Silva ("Petitioner"), a citizen of Cuba, entered
the country without inspection on January 4, 2023. 1 That same day
Petitioner was taken into immigration custody and issued a notice
to appear, denying Petitioner admission into the United States.2
On February 15, 2023, Petitioner was released on his own
recognizance.3 On January 9, 2026, Petitioner was taken into
immigration custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement under§
1225(b)(2) at his check in appointment. 4
immigration custody.
Petitioner remains in
1Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Habeas Petition"),
Docket Entry No. 1, pp. 1, 4 11 2, 13. For purposes of
identification, all page numbers refer to the pagination imprinted
at top of the page by the court's Electronic Case Filing
system.
2Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment and Response to the
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Respondents' MSJ"), Docket
Entry No. 7, p. 2.
at 2-3; Habeas Petition, Docket Entry No. 1, p. 4 i 13.
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
May 15, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:26-cv-01911 Document 9 Filed 05/15/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 3

Pending before the court is Petitioner's Habeas Petition
(Docket Entry No. 1). Petitioner argues that his detention without
a bond hearing violates the Immigration and Nationality Act and due
process. 5
Also pending before the court is Respondents' Motion for
Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 7). Respondents argue that
Petitioner can legally be detained under§ 1225(b)(2) because he is
an applicant for admission. 6 Petitioner has filed a reply. 7
Petitioner argues that because he was detained and ed
upon s entry into the United States, he cannot be detained under
§ 1225(b)(2).8 However, as the Fifth Circuit explained in
Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, 166 F.4th 494 (5th Cir. 2026), because
"presence without admission deems ioner] to be [an]
applicant [] for admission,'' Petitioner is subject to mandatory
detention under § 1225(b)(2). Id. at 498, 502.
Petitioner also argues that because he was previously granted
parole, his detention without a bond hearing violates procedural
due process. 9 First, as explained in Jacobo-Ventura v. Dickey,
Civil Action No. H-25-6117 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 19, 2026), because
5Habeas Petition, Docket Entry No. 1, pp. 9-11 11 32-51.
6Respondents' MSJ, Docket Entry No. 7, pp. 1-2.
f in Reply to Respondents Response to Petition and Motion
for Summary Judgment, Docket Entry No. 8.
in Reply to Respondents Response to Petition, Docket
Entry No. 5, p. 3 11 8-11.
at 5 11 22-25.
-2-
Case 4:26-cv-01911 Document 9 Filed 05/15/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 3

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. Moreover, under § 1226(b),
"[t]he Attorney General at any time may revoke a bond or parole
authorized under subsection (a), rearrest the alien under the
original warrant, and detain the alien." 8 U.S.C. § 1226(b).
Finally, Petitioner argues that his detention without a bond
hearing violates substantive due process.10 But 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.
Kim, 123 S. Ct. 1708, 1721-22 (2003)).
For the reasons explained above, Respondents' Motion for
Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 7) is GRANTED, and Petitioner's
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket Entry No. 1) is DENIED.
The court will enter a final judgment in favor of Respondents.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this 15th day of May, 2026.
10Id. at 4 <n<n 18-20.
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-3-
Case 4:26-cv-01911 Document 9 Filed 05/15/26 in TXSD Page 3 of 3