Hernandez Gomez v. Becerra

Background

Jose Ruben Hernandez Gomez filed a petition asking for court relief from unlawful detention and a motion for a temporary restraining order. He had been in federal immigration custody since November 26, 2021, under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), which generally requires detention for certain noncitizens, including those whom immigration authorities classify as having aggravated-felony convictions. He had not received a bond hearing during his detention.

Hernandez Gomez argued that continuing to detain him without a constitutionally adequate bond hearing violated due process. He also pointed to serious medical problems that developed after a hunger strike, including weight loss, dehydration, pneumonia, acute encephalopathy, and worsening neurological symptoms. The government argued that the court lacked jurisdiction, that Hernandez Gomez was not entitled to release or a bond hearing, and that he should bear the burden of proving that he was not dangerous or likely to flee.

Jurisdiction

The court rejected the government’s argument that only the federal district where Hernandez Gomez was confined could hear his petition. The court found that it had jurisdiction over both the petition and the temporary restraining order.

Entitlement to a Bond Hearing

The court rejected the argument that detention under § 1226(c) eliminates any due-process right to an individualized bond hearing. It also rejected Hernandez Gomez’s request for a fixed rule requiring a bond hearing after six months or another specific period.

Instead, the court applied the balancing test from Mathews v. Eldridge. That test considers the detained person’s interests, the government’s interests, and the risk that the person’s liberty will be wrongly taken away without additional procedures. The court concluded that the factors supported a bond hearing, emphasizing Hernandez Gomez’s prolonged detention, worsening medical condition, ongoing immigration proceedings, and evidence of rehabilitation and good behavior during his incarceration.

The court explained that requiring a bond hearing would not prevent the government from detaining people who are dangerous or likely to flee. It would require the government to justify continued detention through an individualized hearing. The court also determined that prior administrative requests for release were not a substitute for that hearing.

Burden of Proof

The court ruled that the government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Hernandez Gomez remains a flight risk or danger to the community. The court applied that burden even though Hernandez Gomez was detained under § 1226(c).

Disposition

The court granted Hernandez Gomez’s request for a temporary restraining order and his petition in part. It ordered the government to provide him with a constitutionally compliant bond hearing within fourteen days of the order. The order did not itself direct the government to release him.