Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Marina C.,
Petitioner,
v.
Pamela Bondi, Attorney General; Kristi
Noem, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security; Todd M. Lyons,
Acting Director of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; and David
Easterwood, Acting Director, St. Paul
Field Office Immigration and Customs
Enforcement,
Respondents.
File No. 26-cv-494 (ECT/DJF)
OPINION AND ORDER
Kira Aakre Kelley, Climate Defense Project, Minneapolis, MN, for Petitioner Marina C.
Ana H. Voss, United States Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Respondents Pamela
Bondi, Kristi Noem, Todd M. Lyons, and David Easterwood.
Petitioner Marina C. has filed a Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(“Petition” or “Pet.”) [ECF No. 1]. Marina is a Honduran citizen. Pet. ¶ 12. Marina has
“a pending U visa application and does not have a final order of removal.” Id. ¶ 13. “She
has no criminal record.” Id. Marina’s “next immigration court date is not until mid-August
of 2026.” Id. “Respondent ICE”—or its agents—“arrested [Marina] on January 19, 2026”
as part of “Operation Metro Surge.” 	Id. ¶¶ 14–15. 	The Petition asserts, “[u]pon
CASE 0:26-cv-00494-ECT-DJF Doc. 4 Filed 01/24/26 Page 1 of 3

2
information and belief,” that “Respondents had no . . . warrant” for Marina’s arrest. 	Id.
¶ 50.
Marina challenges her detention under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Pet. ¶ 2. She claims she
has been wrongly classified as an 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) detainee (whose detention is
mandatory) rather than an 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) detainee (whose detention is discretionary
and who is entitled to a bond hearing). 	Pet. ¶¶ 26–27; see Jose J.O.E. v. Bondi, 797 F.
Supp. 3d 957, 961–62 (D. Minn. 2025) (explaining legal framework). 	According to
Marina, that misclassification and denial of a bond hearing violate her right to due process
under the Fifth Amendment, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(b)(2), and the Administrative Procedure
Act. See Pet. ¶¶ 28–44. Marina seeks an order requiring Respondents to show cause as to
why Marina should not be released immediately, or in the alternative, afforded a bond
hearing; issuance of a writ of habeas corpus requiring Respondents to release her unless
they provide a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a); an order enjoining her transfer out
of the District of Minnesota during these proceedings; and “any other and further relief this
Court may deem just and proper.” Pet. at 14.
On January 21, 2026, this Court issued an Order directing Respondents to “file an
answer to [Marina’s] Petition by no later than January 23, 2026, certifying the true cause
and proper duration of [Marina’s] confinement and showing cause why the writ should not
be granted in this case.” ECF No. 3 at 1.
As of this writing, Respondents did not file an answer to the Petition, see Dkt.,
meaning Respondents waived any challenge to Marina’s arguments. See Doe v. Mayorkas,
No. 22-cv-752 (ECT/DTS), 2022 WL 4450272, at *2 (D. Minn. Sep. 23, 2022) (citing
CASE 0:26-cv-00494-ECT-DJF Doc. 4 Filed 01/24/26 Page 2 of 3

3
Espey v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, No. 13-cv-2979 (ADM/JSM), 2014 WL 2818657, at *11
(D. Minn. June 19, 2014) (collecting cases)). Accordingly, based on all the files, records,
and proceedings herein, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. 	Petitioner Marina’s Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1]
is GRANTED.
2. 	Respondents shall release Petitioner from custody immediately, but no later
than within 48 hours of this Order.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: January 24, 2026, at 2:45 p.m. 	s/ Eric C. Tostrud
Eric C. Tostrud
United States District Court
CASE 0:26-cv-00494-ECT-DJF Doc. 4 Filed 01/24/26 Page 3 of 3