S.M. v. BONDI

Background

S.M. is identified in the opinion as a refugee from Afghanistan and a resident of St. Paul, Minnesota. Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested her at home on January 25, 2026, and detained her in Minnesota. The opinion states that she had not been charged with or convicted of any crimes, was not in removal proceedings, and was not subject to a removal order.

S.M. filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a court proceeding used to challenge unlawful detention. She argued that her detention violated the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Accardi Doctrine, and the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. The court separately ordered the respondents not to remove her from the District of Minnesota while the petition was pending.

The court also granted S.M.’s motion to proceed under a pseudonym, finding that her need for anonymity outweighed countervailing interests in full disclosure. The respondents took no position on that motion.

Analysis

The respondents argued that 8 U.S.C. § 1159(a)(1) authorized S.M.’s detention. The court rejected that argument for two reasons.

First, the court applied the same analysis it had recently used in a related proceeding involving the legal rights of lawful refugees. It concluded that the statute’s requirement for “inspection and examination” does not permit prolonged detention of refugees who have not adjusted to lawful permanent resident status and have not been charged with a ground of removability. Based on the record, the court found that S.M. was a refugee, had not been charged with or convicted of crimes, was not in removal proceedings, and was not subject to a removal order. The court therefore held that § 1159(a)(1) did not authorize her detention.

Second, the court found that S.M. appeared to be a member of the previously identified “Detained Subclass”—refugees residing in Minnesota who had not adjusted to lawful permanent resident status, had not been charged with a ground of removability, and were detained by the Department of Homeland Security. In the related proceeding, the court had ordered the release of members of that subclass by February 2, 2026.

Order and disposition

The court granted S.M.’s verified petition for a writ of habeas corpus. It ordered the respondents to transport her to Minnesota and release her immediately, with release in Minnesota required no later than 5:00 p.m. on February 2, 2026. If she was already detained in Minnesota, the respondents were required to release her as soon as practicable and no later than that deadline.

The respondents were also ordered to coordinate with S.M.’s counsel so that she would not be left outside in dangerous cold, and the court stated that release to counsel was preferable. They were required to release her with her personal effects, including any driver’s licenses, passports, or immigration documents, and without conditions such as location-tracking devices. The parties were ordered to provide a status update about her release by 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2026.

The court denied S.M.’s motion for a temporary restraining order as moot and granted her motion to proceed under a pseudonym.