Jenkins C. v. Barr

Background

Jenkins C. filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging his continued immigration detention. The opinion states that he had been detained for more than 27 months without a bond hearing. The matter came before Judge Magnuson after Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a report and recommendation on May 4, 2020. The government respondents objected, and Jenkins C. urged the court to adopt the recommendation.

The government’s objections

The government argued that the court should not use factors developed for detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 because Jenkins C.’s detention arose under § 1225. The government did not identify what factors should instead apply. It also argued that the recommendation improperly considered whether Jenkins C. was likely to flee or posed a danger to the community, because an immigration judge would decide those issues at a later detention hearing.

Court’s reasoning

The court rejected the government’s arguments. It held that the Constitution does not permit indefinite detention under § 1225 without some showing that the detained person is likely to flee or harm the community. The court approved use of the six factors identified in Muse v. Sessions for evaluating whether immigration detention has become unreasonably prolonged.

The court explained that the recommendation did not itself decide whether Jenkins C. was likely to flee or posed a danger. Instead, that discussion illustrated the recommendation’s analysis of one factor and was, at most, an aside. The court also concluded that the recommendation properly considered delays caused by Jenkins C.’s requests and correctly observed that the government had not argued or shown that his legal arguments were frivolous. Even after discounting several months attributable to those requests, the court found that more than 27 months of detention without a bond hearing was unconstitutionally long.

Ruling and disposition

Judge Magnuson adopted the report and recommendation. The court granted in part and denied in part the petition under § 2241 because Jenkins C.’s ongoing detention had become unreasonably prolonged in violation of the Fifth Amendment’s due-process guarantee.

The court required an immigration judge to provide Jenkins C. with a bond hearing within 21 days. At that hearing, the immigration judge must make an individualized determination about whether detention is necessary to protect the community or prevent Jenkins C. from fleeing. The court denied the petition in all other respects. The opinion does not state what happened at the later bond hearing.