Guerrero v. Decker
- Katherine Failla
- 1:19-cv-11644
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 13
In Guerrero v. Decker, Judge Failla held immigration officials must justify detention by clear and convincing evidence at a bond hearing.
The ruling directly affected Domingo Guerrero and required the immigration respondents to provide a bond hearing using the Government’s clear-and-convincing-evidence burden or release him.
What happened
In Guerrero v. Decker, Domingo Guerrero challenged the bond hearing held while he was detained during immigration removal proceedings. At that hearing, the immigration judge required Guerrero to prove that he was not dangerous and would not flee, and denied bond.
Guerrero argued that the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act required the Government to justify his continued detention instead. The court resolved the constitutional claim and did not address the Administrative Procedure Act claim.
Judge Failla granted Guerrero’s petition to the stated extent. She ordered the respondents, within 30 days, either to provide a new individualized bond hearing using the required standard or release Guerrero.
The detailed version
- Guerrero v. Decker · No. 1:19-cv-11644
- Katherine Failla
- Mar. 16, 2020
Background
Domingo Guerrero was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) during immigration removal proceedings. An immigration judge held an individualized bond hearing on July 10, 2019. The judge placed the burden on Guerrero to prove that he was not a danger to people or property and was not a flight risk. After considering evidence presented by Guerrero and the Government, the judge denied bond. The Board of Immigration Appeals later dismissed Guerrero’s appeal.
Guerrero filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a law allowing a person to challenge custody that violates the Constitution or federal law. He argued that placing the burden on him violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and the Administrative Procedure Act. The Government argued, among other things, that Guerrero could not show that changing the burden would have affected the bond decision. The court rejected that argument, finding that the immigration judge could have reached a different result if the Government had been required to justify detention under the proper standard.
Court’s Analysis
The court held that due process requires the Government—not the detained person—to prove that detention is justified at a bond hearing under § 1226(a). It further held that the Government must meet that burden by clear and convincing evidence. The court relied on the significant liberty interest affected by detention and found persuasive the reasoning of other courts addressing the same issue. The court distinguished Supreme Court precedent concerning mandatory detention under a different immigration statute.
The court resolved the petition on the constitutional claim and therefore did not decide Guerrero’s Administrative Procedure Act claim.
Disposition
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted Guerrero’s petition to this extent: within 30 days of the opinion and order, the respondents had to provide Guerrero with an individualized bond hearing consistent with the ruling or release him. The court also stated that resolving the petition resolved Guerrero’s emergency application concerning immediate adjudication or interim release. It directed the clerk to enter judgment and close the case.
Read the full 13-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.