Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 2, 2019

Sophia v. Decker

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:19-cv-09599
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasImmigrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sophia v. Decker, Judge Schofield ordered more briefing on whether jurisdiction limits are constitutional in Naishel Sophia’s detention challenge.

Who this affects

Naishel Sophia and the Government parties in his detention challenge; the order required both sides to provide additional briefing.

What happened

Sophia v. Decker concerns Naishel Sophia’s petition asking the court to review the legality and constitutionality of his detention under a federal detention-review law. The petition was filed on October 17, 2019, and the parties finished their initial briefing on November 22, 2019.

Before deciding the petition, the court identified a threshold question: whether it had authority to hear the claims because of federal laws limiting court review of certain immigration matters. The opinion did not decide that question or the legality of Sophia’s detention.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered both sides to submit additional briefing on whether those jurisdiction-limiting laws are constitutional as applied to this case. Sophia’s memorandum was due December 13, 2019; the Government’s response was due January 3, 2020; and Sophia’s reply was due January 10, 2020.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sophia v. Decker · No. 1:19-cv-09599
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Dec. 2, 2019

Background

Naishel Sophia filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a procedure used to challenge the legality of a person’s detention, on October 17, 2019. The parties completed their initial briefing on November 22, 2019. The opinion states that Sophia challenges the legality and constitutionality of his detention.

Issue Identified by the Court

The court identified a threshold jurisdictional question—whether the court has authority to decide Sophia’s claims. It specifically referred to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(5) and § 1252(b)(9), provisions that can limit judicial review of certain immigration-related claims. The court also noted recent appellate decisions addressing the constitutionality of those provisions, including a Second Circuit decision and decisions from the Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits.

Order

The court did not decide whether it had jurisdiction, whether the jurisdiction-limiting provisions are constitutional as applied to Sophia, or whether Sophia’s detention is lawful. Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered additional briefing on the constitutional question. Sophia had to file a memorandum of law by December 13, 2019. The Government had to respond by January 3, 2020, and Sophia had to file a reply by January 10, 2020. The submissions had to comply with the court’s individual rules.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.