Bernal Gutierrez v. Decker

Background

Juan Edgar Bernal Gutierrez filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law allowing a detained person to challenge the legality of detention. He was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during removal proceedings and held at Orange County Correctional Facility in Goshen, New York. He is a citizen of Mexico and had lived in the United States for approximately 28 years.

His detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which does not make detention mandatory. An immigration judge held a bond hearing on May 14, 2020, and denied bond after finding that Petitioner was a danger to the community. The record described two driving-while-ability-impaired violations, in 2009 and 2019, and several arrests for driving without a license between 2006 and 2010. The opinion stated that an appeal of the bond decision appeared to remain pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Petitioner also asked ICE for discretionary release based on a preliminary injunction in a prior related proceeding requiring individualized assessments of flight risk or danger. ICE declined to release him, citing his two impaired-driving convictions.

Claims

Petitioner argued that his continued detention violated substantive and procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment. His substantive due process claim focused on the risk COVID-19 posed because he has Type 2 diabetes. The court explained that this claim required him to show both a serious medical need and deliberate indifference by the respondents. Deliberate indifference means a sufficiently culpable failure to address a serious medical need.

The court noted that Petitioner appeared to present both a conditions-of-confinement theory and a medical-needs theory, but treated them as overlapping because both were based on ICE’s alleged failure to protect him from COVID-19 or release him. Petitioner’s procedural due process claim challenged the conditions at the facility and, separately, the review of his detention.

Court’s reasoning

The court strongly criticized ICE’s decision not to exercise discretion in favor of release. It said that relying on two impaired-driving violations more than ten years apart, neither of which resulted in jail time, was not compelling evidence that Petitioner posed a danger that could not be addressed through conditions of release. The court also stated that reasonable bail conditions existed that could address flight risk and danger to the community.

The court nevertheless held that ICE’s decision, by itself, did not establish a due process violation. It found that Orange County Correctional Facility had taken constitutionally adequate precautions against COVID-19. The facility had no reported inmate cases or symptomatic inmates as of the information considered by the court; detainees had individual cells; negative-pressure rooms were available; the facility had capacity for social distancing; masks were provided and required; the facility was regularly cleaned and sanitized; staff were screened; outside access was suspended; and high-risk detainees were tracked and monitored.

The court also considered the facility’s procedures for new detainees, including testing, medical screening, daily symptom checks, physical examinations, and 14-day quarantine. It concluded that these measures meant the respondents had not acted with deliberate indifference to Petitioner’s medical needs.

As to procedural due process, the court held that the claim based on facility conditions tracked the unsuccessful substantive due process claim. Otherwise, Petitioner did not identify a constitutionally deficient review of his detention or any process that he was entitled to but did not receive.

Disposition

The court denied the petition. The opinion did not add a “with prejudice” or “without prejudice” qualification.