Aode v. Bullock

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
WESTERN DIVISION
TAMER ZAKI AODE,
Petitioner,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 2:26-cv-03343-SHL-atc
v.
CHRISTOPHER BULLOCK, New Orleans
Field Office Director of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; Enforcement and
Removal Operations
Respondent.
ORDER GRANTING PETITION
On October 9, 2026, Petitioner Tamer Zaki Aode filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) He challenges his immigration-related detention
as violative of his Fifth Amendment due process and Fourth Amendment rights. (Id. at PageID
2.) He seeks immediate release from Respondent’s custody. (Id. at PageID 6.) Respondent
responded on October 15, 2026. (ECF No. 6.) Respondent concedes that “this case is covered
by the Sixth Circuit’s recent decision” in Lopez-Campos v. Raycraft, 175 F.4th 713 (6th Cir.
2026). (Id. at PageID 14.)
For the reasons stated below, the Petition is GRANTED and Respondent is ORDERED
to immediately release Petitioner from custody.
BACKGROUND
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Jordan, who entered the United States in December
2023, on an E2 visa as a minor child. (Id.; ECF No. 1 at PageID 2.) He resides with his U.S.
citizen wife and has other family members in the U.S. (ECF No. 1 at PageID 2.) Petitioner was
take into ICE custody on October 2, 2026. (Id.) He remains at the West Tennessee Detention
Case 2:26-cv-03343-SHL-atc Document 7 Filed 10/15/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID
<pageID>

2
Facility. (ECF No. 6 at PageID 15.) He seeks immediate release from Respondent’s custody.
(ECF No. 1 at PageID 6.)
ANALYSIS
Respondent concedes that Lopez-Campos governs this matter. (ECF No. 6 at PageID
14.) Respondent maintains that “the Court should require Petitioner to exhaust administrative
remedies” before granting relief. (ECF No. 6 at PageID 15.) Specifically, according to
Respondent, Petitioner should be required to first request a bond hearing in immigration court
before seeking habeas relief in federal court. (Id. at PageID 15–17.)
However, as the Court has ruled in recent immigration habeas petitions, e.g., Lopez Soza
v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. 26-CV-02224, 2026 WL 1104329, at *3 (W.D. Tenn. Apr.
23, 2026), Petitioner’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies is EXCUSED. The legal
questions presented by the Petition are fit for prompt resolution, and exhaustion would be futile
because Petitioner cannot seek meaningful and timely administrative relief. McCarthy v.
Madigan, 503 U.S. 140, 144 (1992) (explaining that where a statute is silent as to exhaustion,
requiring exhaustion is within a court’s discretion).
Petitioner “rightfully state[s] that [he has] a liberty interest to be free from detention.”
Lopez-Campos, 175 F.4th at 734. ICE’s decision to detain him without a bond hearing violated
that liberty interest, which cannot be casually tossed aside. Thus, Petitioner is entitled to
immediate release. See Villafranca Lara v. Ladwig, No. 26-CV-02079, 2026 WL 401204, at *10
(W.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2026) (quoting Cardona v. Ladwig, No. 25-cv-01451, 2025 WL 3722009,
at *7) (reasoning that “because Petitioner’s rights to a bond hearing under §1226(a)” were
denied, a bond hearing after the fact “‘would not and cannot cure that constitutional violation,’”
and while Petitioner’s release today cannot cure his prior loss of liberty, “‘this remedy, relative
Case 2:26-cv-03343-SHL-atc Document 7 Filed 10/15/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID
<pageID>

3
to the procedural one of ordering a bond hearing, is the one that comes closest to doing so.’”)
(quoting Yao v. Almodovar, No. 25 CIV. 9982, 2025 WL 3653433, at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17,
2025.)).
Therefore, consistent with Lopez-Campos and this Court’s decision in Villafranca Lara,
and after consideration of the record, the Petition is GRANTED.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the Petition is GRANTED. Respondent is ORDERED to
immediately release Petitioner from custody. Further, Respondent is ORDERED to ensure that
Petitioner is released with his personal belongings, including all documentation he had in his
possession when taken into custody. Finally, Respondent is ORDERED to file a Status Report
with this Court within two business days, to certify compliance with this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 15th day of October, 2026.
s/ Sheryl H. Lipman
SHERYL H. LIPMAN
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:26-cv-03343-SHL-atc Document 7 Filed 10/15/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID
<pageID>