Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
ALI MIRZAEE,
Petitioner,
v.
Case No. 2:26-cv-01364-MIS-JHR
TODD M. LYONS, in his official capacity as
Acting Director of the Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; RYAN ELLISON, in
his official capacity as First Assistant U.S.
Attorney of the District of New Mexico;
TODD BLANCHE, in his official capacity as
Acting Attorney General of the United
States; MARKWAYNE MULLIN, in his
official capacity as Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security; MARY
DE ANDA-YBARRA, in her official
capacity as El Paso Field Office Director of
the Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
and WARDEN, Otero County Processing
Center,
Respondents.
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner Ali Mirzaee’s Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus (“Petition”), ECF No. 1, filed April 30, 2026. Respondents Todd M. Lyons, Ryan Ellison,
Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, and Mary De Anda-Ybarra (“Federal Respondents”),1 filed a
Response on May 18, 2026, ECF No. 7.
1 Respondent Warden, Otero County Processing Center, did not file a response or otherwise appear
in this case. It has become standard practice in these habeas cases for the warden of the relevant detention center to
either appear and adopt the federal respondents’ arguments, see, e.g., Intriago-Sedgwick v. Noem, Case No. 1:25-cv-
01065-MIS-LF, Notice of Joinder In USA Respondents’ Forthcoming Claims and Defenses, ECF No. 11 (D.N.M.
Dec. 3, 2025), or not appear at all, see Francisco v. Dedos, Case No. 1:25-cv-01229-MIS-GJF, Proposed Findings and
Recommended Disposition at 8, ECF No. 53 (D.N.M. Jan. 20, 2026).
Case 2:26-cv-01364-MIS-JHR Document 8 Filed 05/19/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Respondents argue that Petitioner is an applicant for admission subject to mandatory
detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). Id. at 3. Respondents acknowledge, however, “this Court
recently reached the opposite conclusion in Duhan v. Noem, Case No. 2:26-cv-00019-MIS-JFR,
2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20895 (D.N.M. Feb. 2, 2026) on facts substantially similar” to this case.
Id. Respondents further acknowledge that “this Court’s decision in Duhan v. Noem, would control
the result here if the Court adheres to that decision.” Id.
Ultimately, the Court finds that Respondents did not distinguish this case from other cases
involving the detention of noncitizens already present in the United States. Id. at 1-5. As the facts
of this case are materially indistinguishable from prior cases the Undersigned Judge has decided
involving habeas petitioners who were detained within the United States, rather than at a border
crossing or port of entry, the Court adopts the findings contained in its Order Granting the Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus in Lopez-Romero v. Lyons, Case No. 2:25-cv-0113-MIS-JHR, 2026
WL 92873 (D.N.M. Jan. 13, 2026). Briefly, the Court finds that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) governs
Petitioner’s detention, his continued detention without a bond hearing violates his Fifth
Amendment right to due process, and, as such, he is entitled to habeas relief. The Court further
finds that Respondents failed to articulate a legitimate interest in Petitioner’s continued detention
and therefore orders his immediate release. See generally Resp., ECF No. 7.
The Court further orders that Petitioner shall not be re-detained without a pre-deprivation
bond hearing before a neutral Immigration Judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the
Government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner is a danger or flight risk.
Finally, the Court retains jurisdiction to ensure compliance with its Order and to entertain any
motions for attorneys’ fees.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
Case 2:26-cv-01364-MIS-JHR Document 8 Filed 05/19/26 Page 2 of 3

3
1. Petitioner Ali Mirzaee’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 1, is
GRANTED;
2. Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release Petitioner from detention;
3. Respondents SHALL NOT re-detain Petitioner without a pre-deprivation hearing
before a neutral Immigration Judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the
Government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner is a
danger or flight risk;
4. Respondents SHALL NOT impose any new condition of release;
5. Respondents SHALL file a Notice of Compliance with this Order; and
6. The Court will separately enter Final Judgment in favor of Petitioner but retain
jurisdiction over this matter to ensure compliance with this Order and to entertain
any motions for attorneys’ fees.
………………………………………….
MARGARET STRICKLAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:26-cv-01364-MIS-JHR Document 8 Filed 05/19/26 Page 3 of 3