Eltayeb v. Genalo
Mohamed Eltayeb Ali Eltayeb v. Kenneth Genalo, New York Field Office Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE/ERO); Todd Lyons, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (DHS); Darrin Margolin, Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review; and Todd Blanche, Acting U.S. Attorney General
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:26-cv-06090
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Mohamed Eltayeb Ali Eltayeb v. Kenneth Genalo, Judge Caproni ordered immigration officials to provide information and temporarily barred removal or certain transfers while reviewing the petition.
Mohamed Eltayeb Ali Eltayeb, the government respondents, and the immigration authorities responsible for his detention, removal, and transfer.
What happened
Mohamed Eltayeb Ali Eltayeb filed a petition asking the federal court to review his immigration detention under a federal law allowing challenges to detention. The opinion does not state where he was detained or the legal basis for his detention.
Judge Caproni ordered the government respondents to provide information by July 21, 2026, including Ali Eltayeb’s detention location, identification number, the laws supporting his detention, any final removal order, and the status of related immigration proceedings. The parties were also ordered to attend a court conference or jointly propose a schedule for further filings.
Judge Valerie Caproni did not decide the petition’s merits. While the petition remained pending, she ordered that Ali Eltayeb could not be removed from the United States or transferred outside specified districts without another court order.
The detailed version
- Eltayeb v. Genalo · No. 1:26-cv-06090
- Valerie Caproni
- July 20, 2026
Background
Mohamed Eltayeb Ali Eltayeb filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law that allows a person to challenge certain forms of detention. The order does not decide whether his detention is lawful. It also does not state his current detention facility, his identification number, or the statutory authority the respondents claim permits his detention.
Information Requested from Respondents
The court ordered the respondents to file a letter by Tuesday, July 21, 2026, at 12:00 p.m. The letter must address:
- Whether Ali Eltayeb was in the Southern District of New York when he filed the petition and, if not, which federal district he was in and whether the case should be transferred there. - His A-number and current place of detention. - The statutory provisions under which the respondents claim authority to detain him. - Whether a cited Second Circuit decision governs the case, whether two cited Southern District of New York cases can be distinguished, and whether the respondents consent to issuance of the requested writ while preserving their arguments for appeal. - A copy of any final order of removal. - The procedural status of any pending Department of Homeland Security or Executive Office for Immigration Review proceedings.
Conference and Temporary Restrictions
The court scheduled a conference for July 21, 2026, at 2:30 p.m. The parties could instead jointly propose a schedule for the respondents’ answer and Ali Eltayeb’s reply if they had no additional matters to discuss in person.
To preserve its ability to decide the petition, the court ordered that Ali Eltayeb not be removed from the United States without a further court order. The court also ordered that he not be transferred unless the transfer was to a facility in the Southern District of New York, the Eastern District of New York, or the District of New Jersey, unless the court later ordered otherwise.
Ruling and Effect
Judge Valerie Caproni issued an order requiring information and further proceedings; she did not grant or deny the habeas petition. The order directed the Clerk of Court to notify the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.