Doe v. Garland
- James Donato
- 3:22-cv-03759
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Doe v. Garland, Judge Donato granted Doe’s habeas petition, ordering release or an individualized bond hearing after eighteen months without one.
John Doe and the federal officials responsible for his immigration detention; the order requires Doe’s release or an individualized bond hearing under specified deadlines.
What happened
Doe v. Garland concerned John Doe’s detention at the Golden State Annex facility while he awaited removal proceedings. Doe had been detained since July 12, 2021, without an individualized hearing to decide whether he should remain detained, and argued that this violated the Fifth Amendment’s protection against unfair deprivation of liberty.
The court recognized that the law generally requires detention for certain people during removal proceedings, but said the Supreme Court had not decided whether detention lasting as long as Doe’s was constitutional without a hearing. Doe had been detained for eighteen months, and the government had not explained why that delay was reasonable or shown that an end to his detention was reasonably certain. The court concluded that Doe’s interest in freedom from prolonged detention outweighed the government’s interest in promptly carrying out removal orders.
Judge Donato granted Doe’s petition. The government must release Doe or provide an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge within 31 days. At that hearing, the government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that continued detention is justified; if the judge does not issue a decision within 14 days after the hearing, Doe must be released. The court also granted Doe’s request to proceed under a pseudonym.
The detailed version
- Doe v. Garland · No. 3:22-cv-03759
- James Donato
- Jan. 10, 2023
Background
John Doe had been detained at the Golden State Annex detention facility in McFarland, California, since July 12, 2021, while removal proceedings were pending. He sought an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge, which he had not received during his detention. Doe alleged that detention without such a hearing violated his due-process rights under the Fifth Amendment.
The parties did not dispute that Doe was subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c). The federal respondents filed a response to the petition, and Doe filed a reply. Neither side requested oral argument. The court also granted Doe’s request to proceed under a pseudonym because it found that anonymity was necessary to protect him from physical harm.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that the Supreme Court has upheld Section 1226(c)’s mandatory-detention provision as facially constitutional—that is, valid generally. But the court noted that the Supreme Court’s earlier decision addressed detention understood to have a definite endpoint and did not involve an as-applied challenge to detention of the exceptional length at issue here.
The court relied on Ninth Circuit and district court decisions recognizing that prolonged civil detention without an opportunity to be heard raises serious constitutional concerns. Even if some of Doe’s detention was attributable to his requests for continuances, he had been detained for eighteen months without a bond hearing. The government had not explained why a delay of that length was reasonable under the circumstances and had not presented evidence that a reasonably certain end to Doe’s custody was in sight.
The court determined that Doe’s interest in freedom from prolonged detention was substantial and that this interest outweighed the government’s interest in promptly carrying out removal orders. The court therefore concluded that Doe was entitled to relief on his petition.
Disposition
The court granted Doe’s habeas petition. It ordered the government either to release Doe from custody or, within 31 days of the order, provide him with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge. At that hearing, the government must bear the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that Doe’s continued detention is justified. If the immigration judge does not issue a decision within 14 days after the hearing, Doe must be released from detention.
The order was issued by Judge James Donato on January 10, 2023.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.