Chavez Murcia, Adin v. Bondi, Pamela et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ADIN FRANCESCO CHAVEZ MURCIA,
Plaintiff,
v.
PAMELA BONDI, KRISTIN NOEM,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
TODD M. LYONS, and U.S. IMMIGRATION AND
CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,
Defendants.
OPINION and ORDER
26-cv-176-jdp
Adin Francisco Chavez Murcia was detained by agents of Department of Homeland
Security’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and he is being held at the Douglas
County jail in Superior, Wisconsin. He is a citizen of El Salvador, but he has resided in the
United States since 2021. He seeks relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, contending that respondents
are violating 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and the Due Process Clause by detaining him without
providing a bond hearing.
This court previously considered the statutory question, holding that individuals who
are “arrested while residing in the United States without legal status” are entitled to a bond
hearing under § 1226(a). See Paredes Padilla v. Galovich, No. 25-cv-863-jdp, 2025 WL 3251446,
at *3 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 21, 2025). The Seventh Circuit recently reached the same conclusion
in a preliminary ruling. Castañon-Nava v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, 161 F.4th 1048,
1060–63 (7th Cir. 2025) (holding that the government was not likely to succeed on its
argument that the non-citizen plaintiffs were subject to mandatory detention with the
opportunity for bond). In their response to the order to show cause, respondents concede that
this case is not factually distinguishable from Paredes Padilla. Dkt. 17, at 2. And they do not
Case: 3:26-cv-00176-jdp Document #: 20 Filed: 03/13/26 Page 1 of 2

2
directly engage with the reasoning of that case or ask the court to reconsider its decision. So
the court concludes that Murcia is entitled to a bond hearing under § 1226(a). This makes it
unnecessary to decide Murcia’s rights under the Due Process Clause. The court will grant the
petition for a writ of habeas corpus and direct the respondents to either release Murcia or
provide him with a bond hearing.
In his reply brief, Murcia contends that the court’s order granting his petition should
include a direction that, at the bond hearing, the government bears the burden to show by clear
and convincing evidence that Murcia’s continued detention is necessary to prevent a risk of
flight or a threat to public safety. That’s unnecessary. The court is ordering the government to
provide Murcia with a bond hearing before an immigration judge under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a),
which implies that the immigration judge will follow all applicable laws in determining whether
Murcia is entitled to release on bond. See 8 C.F.R §§ 236.1, 1003.19, 1236.1.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. 	The petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 filed by Adin
Francisco Chavez Murcia, Dkt. 1, is GRANTED.
2. 	Within seven days, respondents shall either release Murcia or provide him with a
bond hearing before an immigration judge under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
3. 	The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment and close this case.
Entered March 13, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge
Case: 3:26-cv-00176-jdp Document #: 20 Filed: 03/13/26 Page 2 of 2