Fausto v. Raycraft et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
______
LEONARDO FAUSTO,
Petitioner,
v.
KEVIN RAYCRAFT et al.,
Respondents.
____________________________/
Case No. 1:26-cv-1145
Honorable Jane M. Beckering
OPINION
Petitioner, a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainee currently
detained at the North Lake Processing Center located in Baldwin, Lake County, Michigan, initiated
this action by filing a counseled petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
(Pet., ECF No. 1.) For the following reasons, the Court will deny Petitioner’s petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 without prejudice.
I. 	Procedural History
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of his current
detention following an order issued by the Detroit Immigration Court denying him bond, and asks
the Court to, inter alia, issue a writ of habeas corpus ordering Respondents to release Petitioner or
provide Petitioner with a bond hearing where the government bears the burden of proof by clear
and convincing evidence that Petitioner is a flight risk or danger to the community. (Pet., ECF
No. 1, PageID.25.)
In an Order entered on April 13, 2026, the Court directed Respondents to show cause,
within three business days, why the writ of habeas corpus and other relief requested by Petitioner
Case 1:26-cv-01145-JMB-MV ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/21/26 Page 1
of 3

2
should not be granted. (Order, ECF No. 4.) Respondents filed their response and a recording of the
January 30, 2026, bond hearing on April 15, 2026. (Resp., ECF No. 5; Recording of Bond Hearing,
filed on Apr. 15, 2026.) Petitioner filed his reply on April 17, 2026. (ECF No. 7.)
II. 	Relevant Factual Background
Petitioner is a citizen of Brazil who entered the United States in 2021. (Pet., ECF No. 1,
PageID.1.) On June 13, 2025, Petitioner was arrested by ICE agents. (Id.)
On January 9, 2025, Petitioner filed a § 2241 petition challenging his initial detention
without a bond hearing in Fausto v. Raycraft (Fausto I), No. 1:26-cv-75 (W.D. Mich.) In Fausto
I, the Court conditionally granted Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241, ordering Respondents to provide Petitioner with a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(a) within five business days of the date of the Court’s Opinion and Judgment or, in the
alternative, immediately release Petitioner from custody. Op. & Jud., Fausto I, (W.D. Mich. Jan.
28, 2026), (ECF Nos. 6, 7).
On 	January 	30, 	2026, 	Petitioner 	received 	a 	bond 	hearing 	pursuant 	to 	§ 1226(a).
(Immigration Judge Order, ECF No. 1-1, PageID.27.) At the conclusion of that hearing, the
Immigration Judge denied Petitioner’s request for bond, stating: “Flight risk.” (Id.)
III. 	Discussion
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, Petitioner argues that the Immigration Judge did not apply
the constitutionally required burden of proof at Petitioner’s § 1226(a) bond hearing. Specifically,
Petitioner argues that the Immigration Judge failed to require the government to demonstrate
dangerousness or flight risk by clear and convincing evidence. See Soto-Medina v. Lynch,
No. 1:25-cv-1704, --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2026 WL 161002, at *2 (W.D. Mich. Jan. 21, 2026)
(addressing the constitutionally required burden of proof).
Case 1:26-cv-01145-JMB-MV ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/21/26 Page 2
of 3

3
Based on the record before the Court at this time, including the recording of the § 1226(a)
bond hearing, there is no indication in the record that the Immigration Judge applied an
unconstitutional burden of proof at the bond hearing. Under these circumstances, the Court will
deny Petitioner’s § 2241 petition without prejudice.
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed above, the Court will enter a Judgment denying Petitioner’s
petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 without prejudice.
Dated: 	May 21, 2026 	/s/ Jane M. Beckering
Jane M. Beckering
United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-01145-JMB-MV ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/21/26 Page 3
of 3