Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Isabelle Plunkett, Marc Prokosch, PROKOSCH LAW LLC, 1700 West Highway
36, Suite 570, Roseville, MN 55113, for Petitioner.
Ana H. Voss, Jesus Cruz Rodriguez, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE,
300 	South 	Fourth 	Street, 	Suite 	600, 	Minneapolis, 	MN 	55415 	for
Respondents.
Petitioner Jonathan C.B. is a citizen of Colombia. He was arrested and detained by
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) on December 30, 2025. He
JONATHAN C.B.,
Petitioner,
v.
PAMELA BONDI, United States Attorney
General;
KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S. Department
of Homeland Security;
TODD 	M. 	LYONS, 	Acting 	Director 	of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
DAVID EASTERWOOD, Acting Director, St.
Paul 	Field 	Office, 	Immigration 	and
Customs Enforcement; and
RYAN SHEA, Sheriff of Freeborn County,
Minnesota,
Respondents.
Civil No. 26-507 (JRT/LIB)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF
HABEAS CORPUS
CASE 0:26-cv-00507-JRT-LIB Doc. 9 Filed 01/29/26 Page 1 of 5

-2-
filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on January 21, 2026, arguing that he is being
detained unlawfully. Because the Court concludes that Petitioner’s detention is unlawful,
the Court will grant the petition for habeas corpus and order that he be released
immediately. The Court will also order that, if Respondents have transported Petitioner
outside of Minnesota, Respondents must return him to Minnesota prior to his release.
BACKGROUND
Petitioner is a citizen of Colombia who has been present in the United States since
2023. (Verified Pet. Writ Habeas Corpus (“Pet.”) ¶ 2, Jan. 21, 2026, Docket No. 1.) When
Petitioner entered the United States, he was detained and released on his own
recognizance. (Id. ¶ 2.) He was subsequently served with a Notice to Appear and placed
in removal proceedings. (Id. ¶ 3.) Petitioner filed a timely application for asylum, which
remains pending. (Id.)
On the morning of December 30, 2025, Petitioner dropped his three-year-old
daughter off at daycare. 	(Id. ¶ 5.) 	Immediately after the drop-off, Petitioner “had sat
back down in his car to go to work when ICE agents began tapping on his car window.”
(Id.) Petitioner “was pulled out of his car, patted down, and promptly detained.” (Id. ¶ 6.)
None of the four officers who arrested Petitioner offered any reason for his arrest. (Id.)
DISCUSSION
Respondents argue that Petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under 8
U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). 	However, the Court has repeatedly rejected the Government’s
asserted basis for detaining individuals similarly situated to Petitioner under § 1225. See,
CASE 0:26-cv-00507-JRT-LIB Doc. 9 Filed 01/29/26 Page 2 of 5

-3-
e.g., Herrera Avila v. Bondi, No. 25-3741, 2025 WL 2976539 (D. Minn. Oct. 21, 2025),
Romero Santuario v. Bondi, No. 25-4296, 2025 WL 3469577 (D. Minn, Dec. 2, 2025). The
factual record before the Court shows that Jonathan C.B. was arrested while already in
the United States. 	For the same reasons articulated in Herrera Avila and Romero
Santuario, the Court concludes that it possesses jurisdiction over this petition, and that
Jonathan C.B.’s detention is not authorized by § 1225(b)(2).1
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)—indeed, Respondents have failed to produce any documentation supporting
Petitioner’s detention—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.”).
1 Moreover, while Petitioner challenges his detention on several grounds, including his
right to Due Process under the Fifth Amendment, Respondents do not offer any argument
rebutting these claims. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Respondents have arrested and
detained Petitioner unlawfully.
CASE 0:26-cv-00507-JRT-LIB Doc. 9 Filed 01/29/26 Page 3 of 5

-4-
The Court will grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court will order
that Petitioner be immediately released from custody, and that if he is detained outside
of the District of Minnesota, he must first be returned to Minnesota prior to his release.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. 	Petitioner Jonathan C.B.’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 in Minnesota, Respondents shall RELEASE
Petitioner from custody as soon as practicable, and no later than 48 hours
from the filing of this Order.
c. 	If Petitioner has been transferred out of the District of Minnesota,
Respondents shall immediately TRANSPORT Petitioner to Minnesota, and
then RELEASE Petitioner from custody no later than 48 hours after 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.
CASE 0:26-cv-00507-JRT-LIB Doc. 9 Filed 01/29/26 Page 4 of 5

-5-
e. 	Respondents must release Petitioner with all personal documents, such as
driver’s 	licenses, 	passports, 	or 	immigration 	documents, 	and 	without
conditions such as location tracking devices.
f. 	The 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 2,
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: January 29, 2026 	_____/s/ John R. Tunheim ______
at Minneapolis, Minnesota 	JOHN R. TUNHEIM
at 5:29 PM 	United States District Judge
CASE 0:26-cv-00507-JRT-LIB Doc. 9 Filed 01/29/26 Page 5 of 5