Torres v. Francis
Liliana Del Cisne Rueda Torres v. LaDeon Francis, in his official capacity as Acting Field Office Director of New York Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.
- Ho
- 1:25-cv-08408
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rueda Torres v. Francis, Judge Ho ordered the government to respond to an immigration-detention petition and barred removal meanwhile.
Liliana Del Cisne Rueda Torres, the immigration officials named as respondents, Fabian Arias as the petition’s next friend, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
What happened
Liliana Del Cisne Rueda Torres v. LaDeon Francis concerns a petition filed under a federal law allowing a detained person to ask a court for relief. The petition says Rueda Torres was taken into custody on October 9, 2025, after an immigration-court hearing, and was filed on her behalf by Fabian Arias as a representative called a “next friend.”
The court ordered the U.S. Attorney’s Office to file an answer or another response within 60 days. Rueda Torres may file a reply within 30 days after receiving the response. The court also ordered the respondents to report where she is detained and to update the court if that location changes. Rueda Torres may not be removed from the United States unless and until the court allows it.
Judge Dale E. Ho issued an order managing the case while it proceeds; the opinion does not decide whether Rueda Torres is entitled to relief. The clerk was directed to notify the U.S. Attorney’s Office and mail the order to Arias.
The detailed version
- Torres v. Francis · No. 1:25-cv-08408
- Ho
- Oct. 11, 2025
Background
Liliana Del Cisne Rueda Torres filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal statute that allows a person in custody to seek relief from that custody. The opinion states that she was taken into custody on October 9, 2025, after a hearing at a New York City immigration court. Fabian Arias filed the petition on her behalf as her “next friend.”
The order explains that a next friend must generally show why the person seeking relief cannot appear personally and must show dedication to that person’s best interests. The court did not make an express ruling in this order on whether Arias satisfied those requirements.
Court’s Orders
The court ordered the Clerk of Court to electronically notify the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York that the order had been issued. The clerk was also directed to mail a copy of the order to Arias at the address listed in the petition.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office must file an answer or another pleading responding to the petition within 60 days of the order. Rueda Torres may file reply papers within 30 days after being served with the respondents’ answer. The respondents must promptly tell the court where Rueda Torres is detained and must promptly report any change in her detention location.
To protect the court’s ability to decide the case, the court ordered that Rueda Torres must not be removed from the United States unless and until the court orders otherwise. The order also included administrative instructions concerning electronic filing, counsel, conferences, and requests to extend deadlines or postpone conferences.
What the Order Decides
This is an order to answer and to preserve the court’s jurisdiction while the petition is pending. It does not decide the merits of Rueda Torres’s petition or state that she must be released. Judge Dale E. Ho ordered the respondents to respond and temporarily barred her removal pending further order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.