Tall v. Joyce
- Subramanian
- 1:25-cv-09781
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Tall v. Joyce, Judge Subramanian barred transfer, ordered a temporary-restraint response, and sought volunteer counsel in Tall’s habeas case.
Abdou Tall is protected from transfer outside the Southern District of New York without prior court approval and may receive an effort to locate volunteer counsel. The respondents must meet the response deadline on the temporary restraining-order motion.
What happened
Abdou Tall v. William Joyce, et al. is a petition asking the court to review Tall’s detention. Tall filed it under a federal detention-review law while in the Southern District of New York, with help from Madou Kone, identified as his next friend.
The court barred the respondents from transferring Tall outside the Southern District of New York without prior approval. It set deadlines for responses and a reply concerning Tall’s request for a temporary restraining order. The court also directed the clerk to try to find a volunteer lawyer, while explaining that no lawyer was guaranteed.
Judge Arun Subramanian ordered these interim and case-management measures but did not decide whether Tall should win the detention petition or the temporary restraining-order request. The court also ruled that Tall could not proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal from this order because such an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Tall v. Joyce · No. 1:25-cv-09781
- Subramanian
- Nov. 25, 2025
Background
On November 24, 2025, Abdou Tall filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law allowing a person to challenge certain forms of detention. The petition was filed while Tall was present in the Southern District of New York and was assisted by Madou Kone, whom the order identifies as Tall’s next friend. The order does not decide the merits of the detention challenge.
Orders concerning transfer and temporary relief
The court enjoined, meaning prohibited, the respondents from transferring Tall to any location outside the Southern District of New York without the court’s prior approval. The respondents must respond to Tall’s motion for a temporary restraining order by December 2, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. Tall may file a reply by December 8, 2025. The order does not state the court’s ultimate decision on that motion.
Request for volunteer counsel
The court found that seeking pro bono counsel—an attorney who volunteers legal services—was appropriate. Applying the factors described in Hodge v. Police Officers, the court cited the complex legal questions concerning Tall’s detention, his incarceration, and the emergency nature of the petition as reasons that his ability to investigate facts and present the case was significantly limited. The court directed the clerk to attempt to locate a volunteer attorney.
The court explained that it lacks authority to appoint a lawyer involuntarily and can only request that an attorney volunteer. It also stated that there was no guarantee that an attorney would accept the case or that another volunteer would be found if the first effort failed. Tall was therefore told to be prepared to proceed without a lawyer. If Tall had already obtained counsel or did not want the court to seek a volunteer, he was directed to notify the court.
Other directions and disposition
The clerk was directed to notify the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and to mail a copy of the order to Kone. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Tall permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees. Judge Arun Subramanian’s order grants interim transfer protection and directs an effort to find volunteer counsel, but it does not resolve the habeas petition or the temporary restraining-order motion.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.