Maria W. v. Garland
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:24-cv-00213
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 5
In Maria W. v. Garland, Judge Tostrud denied as moot Maria W.’s detention petition after her removal order became final.
Maria W., who was detained by immigration authorities, was denied a bond hearing and immediate release because the court found her detention petition moot after her removal order became final.
What happened
Maria W. v. Garland concerned Maria W.’s challenge to her prolonged immigration detention. She asked for an individual bond hearing or immediate release while her removal appeal was pending.
After the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed Maria’s removal order and dismissed her appeal, the government argued that her petition was moot. The court agreed because her detention authority had changed from the statute governing detention before a final removal order to the statute governing detention after one.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud rejected the magistrate judge’s recommendation as moot, overruled Maria’s objection, and denied her detention petition as moot.
The detailed version
- Maria W. v. Garland · No. 0:24-cv-00213
- Eric Tostrud
- Apr. 18, 2024
Background
Maria W., a citizen of Mexico and a lawful permanent resident of the United States, had been detained at the Kandiyohi County Jail since August 1, 2023. After serving a 10-month sentence for conspiring to transport illegal aliens, she was transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody. An Immigration Judge ordered her removed to Mexico, and she appealed that order to the Board of Immigration Appeals.
In January 2024, Maria filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a statute that allows a person to challenge unlawful detention in federal court. She argued that her lengthy detention before removal violated her due-process rights. She requested an individualized bond hearing and later also requested immediate release.
Report and Recommendation and Objection
Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz recommended granting the request for a bond hearing, with the government bearing the burden of proof, and denying the request for immediate release. Maria objected only to the recommended deadline for the bond hearing and otherwise asked the court to adopt the recommendation.
After the recommendation was issued, the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed Maria’s removal order and dismissed her appeal on April 2, 2024. The respondents argued that this made Maria’s petition moot, meaning that the court no longer had a live dispute to decide.
Court’s Analysis
The court reviewed the recommendation anew because Maria had objected. It concluded that her pre-removal detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) ended when the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed her appeal and her removal order became administratively final.
The court explained that detention authority then shifted to 8 U.S.C. §
- That statute requires detention during the 90-day removal period, which began on April 2,
- Relying on a prior related proceeding, the court concluded that a petition challenging detention under § 1226 becomes moot when the removal order becomes final and the government’s detention authority shifts to §
- The court also stated that Maria was still within the presumptively reasonable period of detention following a final removal order.
Disposition
Judge Eric C. Tostrud ordered three things: the Report and Recommendation was rejected as moot; Maria’s objection was overruled; and her petition for a writ of habeas corpus was denied as moot. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.