Abdirahman A. v. Blanche

Background

Abdirahman A. is a citizen of Somalia, entered the United States as a refugee in 1991, and is a lawful permanent resident. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and its Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations arrested him on April 1, 2026, while he was being released from Anoka County Jail after a separate criminal matter. The agencies had issued a Form I-200 arrest warrant on March 11, 2026, but the Department of Homeland Security issued a notice charging him with being subject to removal only on April 2, 2026.

Abdirahman A. was detained at Sherburne County Jail. In his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus—a court petition challenging unlawful detention—he argued that his arrest was unlawful because it did not follow the required regulatory sequence and because the officers lacked the required basis for a warrantless arrest under 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2). He sought immediate release.

Report and Recommendation and Objections

Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko recommended granting the amended petition and ordering Abdirahman A.’s release. The respondents objected on two grounds: they argued that the record showed a reason to believe Abdirahman A. was likely to escape before a warrant could be obtained, and that release was not the proper remedy for a violation of the warrantless-arrest statute.

Merits Analysis

The court reviewed the challenged portions of the recommendation independently. Section 1357(a)(2) permits a warrantless immigration arrest when the arresting officer has reason to believe that the person is likely to escape before an arrest warrant can be obtained. The court applied a probable-cause standard based on the total circumstances known to the officers at the time of the arrest.

The court concluded that the respondents had not shown that officers had reason to believe Abdirahman A. was likely to escape. The fact that officers lacked a reason to believe he would remain at the jail while they obtained another warrant did not itself establish that he was likely to evade immigration detention. The record also did not explain how the circumstances of the arrest led officers to believe he would escape. In addition, the fact that ICE had already issued a Form I-200 warrant before the arrest undermined the claim that officers believed a warrant could not be obtained before he escaped.

The court also held that release was the appropriate remedy for the unlawful arrest. It rejected the respondents’ comparisons to criminal prosecutions and to the exclusion of evidence in immigration proceedings, explaining that Abdirahman A. was challenging his detention, not asking the court to prevent his removal proceedings. The court further rejected the argument that he could not be released before seeking a bond hearing because the statute and regulations required a valid warrant as a predicate to the arrest and later bond proceedings.

Additional Motion and Disposition

After briefing on the recommended decision ended, Abdirahman A. sought permission to supplement his reply so he could ask the court to bar the respondents from re-detaining him on the same statutory basis. The court denied that motion. It stated that the order did not prevent the respondents from later arresting or detaining Abdirahman A. under lawful authority and in compliance with constitutional, statutory, and regulatory requirements.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud overruled the respondents’ objections, accepted the Report and Recommendation, denied the motion for leave to supplement and the supplement to the reply, granted Abdirahman A.’s amended petition, and ordered the respondents to immediately release him from custody.