Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Gladis Isbela Varela Verde, a Honduran citizen, entered the United States without inspection in 2025. Immigration authorities took her into custody on August 11, 2026, and served her with a Notice to Appear charging her as inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) because she was present without having been admitted or paroled.
Varela Verde remained in immigration custody and petitioned for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, arguing that detention without a bond hearing violated due process. The respondents moved for summary judgment, asserting that she was an applicant for admission subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2).
The Court’s Holding
The district court held that Varela Verde’s presence in the country without admission made her an applicant for admission and therefore subjected her to mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2). The court relied on the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi.
The court further held that the mandatory detention did not violate substantive or procedural due process. It reasoned that detention during removal proceedings is constitutionally permissible and that, because Congress mandated detention of applicants for admission until specified proceedings conclude, Varela Verde had no procedural due-process right to a bond hearing.
The court granted the respondents’ motion for summary judgment, denied the habeas petition, and directed entry of final judgment for the respondents.
Key Takeaways
- A noncitizen present without admission is treated as an applicant for admission for purposes of § 1225(b)(2).
- Section 1225(b)(2) requires detention of applicants for admission while the relevant immigration proceedings remain pending.
- The court found no substantive or procedural due-process right to an individualized bond hearing under these circumstances.
Why It Matters
The ruling applies Fifth Circuit authority treating people who entered without inspection as applicants for admission subject to mandatory detention. In the Southern District of Texas, that classification can foreclose habeas claims seeking bond hearings while removal proceedings are ongoing.