Roberts v. De Anda-Ybarra

The petitioner, Budude Allison Zawu Roberts, a Liberian citizen subject to a removal order from 2003, holds withholding of removal to Liberia under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3). ICE detained her on 16 January 2026 to carry out her removal, before any third country had been designated, and she petitioned for habeas corpus under Zadvydas v. Davis. On 29 April 2026, answering the court’s order, the government said it expected to remove her to Sierra Leone in May. It argued that it need not let her apply for withholding because “Sierra Leone has issued Department of State approved assurances” that “any aliens removed there will not be persecuted or tortured,” and that accepting those assurances was a matter for the executive.

The court rejected six jurisdictional objections. Reading 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) narrowly under Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, it held that “whether the Government may lawfully remove an alien is a purely legal issue, meaning that § 1252(g) does not strip the Court of jurisdiction to decide it.” It also held that sections 1252(a)(2), (a)(4), (a)(5) and (b)(9) and FARRA § 2242(d) did not bar review.

On the merits: “the Government’s categorical determination that ‘aliens removed . . . [to Sierra Leone] will not be subject to persecution or torture’ is a far cry from the ‘individualized determinations’ that 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3) and CAT demand. Indeed, there is absolutely no indication that the Government considered Petitioner’s specific circumstances (as it was required to do) before it designated Sierra Leone as her country of removal.” Agency guidance, it said, cannot “supplant the INA’s removal procedures.” It distinguished Munaf v. Geren: “The issue here isn’t whether the Government was justified in accepting Sierra Leone’s assurances that aliens removed there won’t be persecuted or tortured. Rather, the issue is whether the Government may remove aliens to any third country without allowing them to seek withholding of removal.”