Shukri H. v. Barr
- Patrick Schiltz
- 0:19-cv-01945
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Shukri H. v. Barr, Judge Thorson ordered respondents to answer a detention petition, allowed fee-free filing, and did not decide the petition’s merits.
Shukri H. must follow the reply deadline if he responds, and the respondents must file the ordered answer and supporting materials within 30 days.
What happened
In Shukri H. v. Barr, Shukri H. asked the court to review the legality and duration of his confinement through a habeas petition.
The court ordered the respondents to answer within 30 days, provide evidence and legal arguments supporting the confinement, and recommend whether a hearing was needed. The court interpreted the petition as raising a claim about whether Shukri H.’s removal was likely to occur soon. It also allowed Shukri H. to proceed without paying filing fees.
The order did not decide whether the petition should succeed. Judge Thorson required any reply to be filed within 30 days after the respondents’ answer and barred further submissions unless the court authorized them.
The detailed version
- Shukri H. v. Barr · No. 0:19-cv-01945
- Patrick Schiltz
- Aug. 13, 2019
Background
Shukri H. filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, asking the court to address the legality and duration of his confinement. The court interpreted the petition as raising a claim under Zadvydas v. Davis and directed the respondents to address whether his removal was reasonably foreseeable in the near future.
Orders concerning the petition
The court ordered the respondents to file an answer within 30 days. The answer had to certify the true cause and proper duration of Shukri H.’s confinement and show why the requested writ should not be granted. It also had to include:
- affidavits and exhibits needed to establish the lawfulness and correct duration of the confinement; - a reasoned memorandum explaining the respondents’ legal and factual position; and - the respondents’ recommendation about whether the court should hold an evidentiary hearing.
Shukri H. could file a reply within 30 days after the respondents filed their answer. The court stated that no further submissions would be permitted unless authorized by court order.
Filing-fee ruling and disposition
The court granted Shukri H.’s application to proceed without paying filing fees. The order required further briefing and did not decide the merits of the habeas petition.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court set an answer and briefing schedule and granted the filing-fee application without deciding whether Shukri H.’s confinement violated the law.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.