Alejandro S. v. Government

Background

On August 26, 2026, Alejandro S. filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of his ongoing detention pending removal proceedings. The Minnesota court directed the government to respond and explain why the petition should not be granted.

The government then reported that Alejandro S. had been transferred to a facility within the Western District of Texas one day before the Minnesota court received the petition. The government also reported that Alejandro S. had started a substantively identical habeas proceeding in that district after the transfer. That earlier related proceeding, No. 3:26-cv-2227 (W.D. Tex.), remained ongoing.

Venue and Jurisdiction

The court explained that the usual respondent in a habeas case is the warden of the facility where the detained person is held, and that the proper venue generally is where that warden can be found and served. A transfer after proper service would not ordinarily eliminate the original court’s jurisdiction.

Here, however, the transfer occurred before the Minnesota court received the petition and before the government was served. The court therefore concluded that Minnesota was not an appropriate venue for the litigation when it was filed.

Disposition

The court stated that, if no similar habeas case were pending in Texas, it would transfer this case to the Western District of Texas for consideration on the merits. Because the Texas proceeding was already ongoing, the court concluded that transferring this matter would serve no useful purpose and would not be in the interest of justice.

Judge Katherine Menendez ordered that the habeas petition be denied without prejudice and that the matter be dismissed. The order stated that the dismissal was not intended to affect the outcome of the ongoing Texas habeas proceeding.