Otero Escalante v. Bondi

Background

Jose Jacob Otero Escalante is a citizen of Honduras who entered the United States without authorization in February 2014. ICE agents arrested him in Burnsville, Minnesota, on June 23, 2025. He was being held at the ICE Detention Center in Albert Lea, Minnesota.

Otero Escalante requested a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). An immigration judge denied that request after determining that the government had detained him under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), a provision that does not allow release on bond. Otero Escalante argued that the government had improperly treated him as subject to that provision instead of the provision allowing a bond hearing.

Emergency motion and analysis

Otero Escalante filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. A temporary restraining order is short-term emergency relief intended to preserve existing conditions while a case is considered. He asked the court to prevent the respondents from moving him outside the District of Minnesota and to require a bond hearing within seven days.

The court analyzed the four factors used for emergency injunctive relief: likely irreparable harm, the balance of harms, the likelihood of success, and the public interest. It found that all four factors favored Otero Escalante as to his request to remain in Minnesota. The court concluded that a transfer could significantly reduce his access to counsel and impair his ability to litigate the case. It found the burden on the respondents of keeping him in Minnesota temporarily would be minimal, and that the public had an interest in allowing his claims about federal immigration-detention practices to be fairly presented.

The court also found that Otero Escalante had raised a substantial question about whether the government lawfully detained him without a bond hearing. The court did not decide whether he was entitled to a bond hearing, stating that the report and recommendation addressed only whether he should be temporarily protected from removal from the District of Minnesota.

Disposition

The court recommended that the emergency motion be GRANTED IN PART insofar as the respondents should be enjoined from moving Otero Escalante outside the District of Minnesota until fourteen days after an order adopting the report and recommendation is filed or until the case concludes, whichever occurs sooner, unless the court extends the period for good cause or the respondents consent.

The court recommended issuing that restriction without additional notice because of the exigent circumstances described in the opinion. The court separately ordered the respondents to file any objections by 5:00 p.m. on August 1, 2025, and to file briefing responding to the emergency motion by August 7, 2025. The notice states that the report and recommendation is not a district-court order or judgment and is not directly appealable to the Eighth Circuit.