Reported / Citable
Background
Saleh Al Shaibah, a lawful permanent resident since 2005, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He was detained in December 2025 and charged with removability due to a controlled-substances conviction. Although he was found removable in February 2026 and his applications for cancellation of removal, asylum, and withholding of removal were denied in April 2026, his appeal of the removal order remains pending.
Al Shaibah contended that his continued detention is unlawful, violating his Fifth Amendment Due Process rights. The court examined whether his petition plainly showed he was not entitled to relief, which would allow for summary dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 2243 and relevant rules.
The Court’s Holding
The District Court denied Al Shaibah’s petition for habeas corpus and dismissed the action with prejudice. The court determined that because Al Shaibah’s removal order is not yet final, his detention falls under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), which mandates detention for persons deportable due to certain controlled-substances convictions, rather than § 1231.
Citing Supreme Court precedent in *Jennings v. Rodriguez*, the court reiterated that individuals detained under § 1226(c) are not entitled to release for due process claims; release is only permitted under narrow, statutorily recognized circumstances, such as for witness protection. The court explicitly rejected the argument that due process requires an opportunity for release before the conclusion of removal proceedings, noting that § 1226(c) detention has a “definite termination point” at the conclusion of removal proceedings. Furthermore, the court found it lacked jurisdiction to review the Attorney General’s discretionary decision regarding detention under § 1226(c), as outlined in 8 U.S.C. § 1226(e).
Key Takeaways
- Habeas corpus petitions can be summarily dismissed if it’s clear from the face of the petition that the petitioner is not entitled to relief.
- Detention of non-citizens pending removal proceedings due to controlled-substances convictions is mandatory under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) when the removal order is not yet final.
- The Supreme Court has clarified that due process does not require an opportunity for release for individuals detained under § 1226(c) before the conclusion of their removal proceedings.
- Federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the Attorney General’s discretionary decisions concerning detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c).
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces the strict statutory framework governing the mandatory detention of non-citizens facing removal for certain criminal offenses, particularly controlled-substances convictions, when their removal proceedings are still pending appeal. It underscores that challenges to such detention on Fifth Amendment due process grounds are unlikely to succeed in federal court, given established Supreme Court precedent that views detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) as having a “definite termination point”—the conclusion of removal proceedings—beyond which no early release is generally afforded. Attorneys representing non-citizens in similar situations should be aware of the limited avenues for relief from detention until their underlying removal proceedings are finalized.