Court
D. Nev.
Decided
October 22, 2026
Docket
2:26-cv-01659-GMN-EJY (ECF No. 20)
Judge
Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge.
Outcome
Relief granted
Disposition
First amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus granted; motion for a temporary restraining order denied as moot. Release ordered no later than 26 October 2026 under reasonable terms of supervision. Respondents “prohibited from re-detaining Petitioner in the future absent proof of changed circumstances making his removal reasonably foreseeable”, and “prohibited from removing Petitioner to a third country without providing Petitioner with adequate notice of intent to seek removal to a third country and due process in the form of an opportunity to seek to reopen Petitioner’s immigration court proceedings to seek fear-based relief from removal.”
Nationality
Native and citizen of Cuba. Released into the United States in 1995; ordered removed to Cuba on 23 August 2000 while serving a state sentence; released on an order of supervision on 23 August 2002, after about four months in immigration detention, because his removal to Cuba could not be carried out, and complied with it for twenty-four years. Arrested on 17 May 2026 and transferred to ICE custody two days later, when his order of supervision was revoked.
Third country
Mexico. ICE issued a Notice of Removal stating that it intended to remove him to Mexico.
The court counted his detention cumulatively: “Adding together the four-month period of detention in 2002 and the five-month period of re-detention since May 19, 2026, Petitioner’s detention has long since surpassed the six-month period of presumptive reasonableness.” Removal to Cuba or Mexico was not reasonably foreseeable: “Respondents submit no evidence that DHS has attempted to coordinate a transfer to Mexico”, such as travel documents or communications with Mexican officials. It noted that courts “have also found that removal to Mexico is unlikely where the petitioner does not consent.”
On removal to a third country: “Respondents mischaracterize ICE’s burden in third-country removals. Courts in this circuit have repeatedly found that the government must undertake rigorous procedures to afford a noncitizen their full due process rights before ordering him removed to a third country.” It held that he “has a due process right to receive meaningful notice and opportunity to present a fear-based claim to an IJ before DHS deports him to Mexico or another third country.”
Caution
The order records no grant of protection to the petitioner; the case concerns detention and the process owed before removal to a third country. The companion order of 28 October 2026 in Vega Oramas v. Bondi, by the same judge, is recorded separately in this register.
Third-country removal
Detention
Zadvydas
Re-detention
Notice
Due process
Fear-based claim
Mexico
Consent
Habeas jurisdiction
The court's own text
Public copy
Read from the public federal court record.
This entry describes a court decision. It is a summary for readers who are learning how these cases work, not legal advice, and it does not tell anyone what to do in their own case. A decision may have been appealed, stayed, or superseded since this entry was written.
← All decisions in the register