Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
JOSE L.A.,
Petitioner,
v.
PAMELA BONDI, United States Attorney
General;
KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S. Department
of Homeland Security;
TODD 	M. 	LYONS, 	Acting 	Director,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
DAVID EASTERWOOD, Acting Director, St.
Paul Field Office, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; and
WARDEN, 	Karnes 	County 	Immigration
Processing Center, Karnes City, Texas;
Respondents.
Civil No. 26-1327 (JRT/SGE)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF
HABEAS CORPUS
Samuel Verner, ZIMMER LAW GROUP, 155 Wabasha Street South, Suite
155, Saint Paul, MN 55107, for Petitioner.
David W. Fuller and Matthew Isihara, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE,
300 	South 	Fourth 	Street, 	Suite 	600, 	Minneapolis, 	MN 	55415 	for
Respondents Pamela Bondi, Kristi Noem, Todd M. Lyons, David Easterwood.
Petitioner Jose L.A. was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(“ICE”) officials on January 14, 2026, while at a scheduled interview he had to attend as a
CASE 0:26-cv-01327-JRT-SGE Doc. 6 Filed 02/14/26 Page 1 of 4

- 2 -
condition of his release. 	(Verified Pet. for Writ of Habeas Corpus ¶ 16, Feb. 11, 2026,
Docket No. 1.) On February 11, 2026, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus,
challenging the lawfulness of his detention. 	(Id.) 	Because the Court concludes that
Petitioner is being detained unlawfully, the Court will grant the petition and order
Petitioner’s immediate release.
DISCUSSION
Petitioner Jose L.A. is a citizen of Colombia and a resident of Apple Valley,
Minnesota. 	(Pet. ¶ 8.) 	He has a pending asylum application and does not have a final
order of removal. (Id. ¶ 15.) Petitioner is currently detained in Texas. (Id. ¶ 8.)1
Respondents rely on 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) to justify Petitioner’s detention. 	The
Court rejects that justification. 	After thorough review of the parties’ filings, the Court
concludes that the legal issues presented by Petitioner’s habeas petition are subject to
the same analysis the Court recently employed in Herrera Avila v. Bondi, Civ. No. 25-3741,
2025 WL 2976539 (D. Minn. Oct. 21, 2025); Romero Santuario v. Bondi, Civ. 25-4296, 2025
WL 3469577 (D. Minn, Dec. 2, 2025); and Iishaar-Abdi v. Klang, Civ. No. 25-4686, 2025 WL
3764853, at *1 n.2 (D. Minn. Dec. 30, 2025). Section 1225(b)(2) does not authorize the
mandatory detention of an individual already present in the United States.
1 Respondents raise no jurisdictional argument here. The Court nevertheless emphasizes
that for the reasons set out in other cases, the fact of Petitioner’s present location in Texas does
not deprive the Court of jurisdiction. 	See Christian A.S.C. v. Bondi, Civ. No. 26-778, 2026 WL
323098 at *1–2 (D. Minn. Feb. 6, 2026).
CASE 0:26-cv-01327-JRT-SGE Doc. 6 Filed 02/14/26 Page 2 of 4

- 3 -
The Court therefore turns to the proper remedy. Where, as here, (1) Respondents
erroneously assert that a detainee is being held pursuant to § 1225(b)(2) and (2)
Respondents have not produced a warrant, as is required to effectuate an arrest pursuant
to § 1226(a), the appropriate remedy is release from custody. 	See, e.g., Ahmed M. v.
Bondi, No. 25-4711, 2026 WL 25627, at *3 (D. Minn. Jan. 5, 2026); Lauro M. v. Bondi, No.
26-134, 2026 WL 115022, at *3 (D. Minn. Jan. 15, 2026); cf. Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674,
693 (2008) (“Habeas is at its core a remedy for unlawful executive detention. . . . The
typical remedy for such detention is, of course, release.”).
The Court will grant Jose L.A.’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and will order
that he be released from custody.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. 	Petitioner Jose L.A.’s Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. [1])
is GRANTED, as follows:
a. 	Petitioner 	is 	not 	subject 	to 	mandatory 	detention 	under 	8 	U.S.C.
§ 1225(b)(2).
b. 	If Petitioner is being detained outside of Minnesota, Respondents shall
TRANSPORT Petitioner to Minnesota and RELEASE Petitioner from custody
immediately. Petitioner’s release in Minnesota must occur no later than 48
hours after the filing of this Order.
CASE 0:26-cv-01327-JRT-SGE Doc. 6 Filed 02/14/26 Page 3 of 4

- 4 -
c. 	If Petitioner is being detained in Minnesota, Respondents shall RELEASE
Petitioner from custody as soon as practicable, and no later than 48 hours
from the filing of this Order.
d. 	Given the severe weather conditions in Minnesota, Respondents are
ORDERED to coordinate with Petitioner’s counsel to ensure that upon
Petitioner’s release, they are not left outside in dangerous cold. 	It is
preferable to release Petitioner to counsel to ensure humane treatment.
e. 	Respondents must release Petitioner with all personal effects, such as
driver’s 	license, 	passports, 	or 	immigration 	documents, 	and 	without
conditions such as location tracking devices.
f. 	Respondents are ENJOINED from re-detaining Petitioner under this same
statutory theory, absent materially changed circumstances.
g. 	Both parties shall provide the Court with a status update concerning the
status of Petitioner’s release by no later than 5:00 p.m. on February 17,
2026. 	Further, the parties shall advise the Court whether any additional
proceedings in this matter are required and submit any proposals for the
scope of further litigation.
DATED: February 14, 2026
at Minneapolis, Minnesota. 	JOHN R. TUNHEIM
Time: 4:24 p.m. 	United States District Judge
CASE 0:26-cv-01327-JRT-SGE Doc. 6 Filed 02/14/26 Page 4 of 4