Reported / Citable
Background
Dalila Leyva-Suarez is in custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to challenge her ongoing immigration detention. She was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) and had been held for more than 90 days at the time of the petition.
Respondents filed a motion for summary judgment seeking to uphold her detention. The petitioner opposed the motion, arguing she was entitled to a bond hearing. The district court considered the motion in light of the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision in Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega, decided July 2, 2026.
The Court’s Holding
The district court granted the petition for a writ of habeas corpus in part. The court concluded that because Leyva-Suarez had been detained for more than 90 days under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), she is entitled to a bond hearing under Fifth Circuit precedent established in Sosnava Rodriguez.
The court ordered that ICE must either release the petitioner from custody or provide a bond hearing by August 10, 2026. If a bond hearing is held, the government must articulate an individualized justification for further detention without bond. The government must provide at least 48 hours’ notice to the petitioner and counsel before the bond hearing or release. The court denied respondents’ motion for summary judgment and ordered the parties to file status updates and advisories by August 17 and September 10, 2026, respectively.
Key Takeaways
- Immigrants detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) are entitled to a bond hearing after 90 days of detention under recent Fifth Circuit precedent.
- The government cannot hold detainees beyond 90 days without providing an individualized justification for continued detention at a bond hearing.
- ICE must provide at least 48 hours’ notice before any bond hearing or release of a detainee.
Why It Matters
This decision applies recent Fifth Circuit precedent requiring bond hearings for immigration detainees held 90+ days and expands procedural protections for individuals in ICE custody. The decision ensures that immigration detainees are not held indefinitely without judicial review and an opportunity to challenge detention based on individualized factors.
For ICE and immigration enforcement practitioners, the order clarifies that mere passage of 90 days triggers a right to a bond hearing, and that summary judgment motions denying such hearings will not succeed. For immigration attorneys and detainees, the ruling provides a concrete enforcement mechanism to challenge prolonged detention in the Southern District of Texas and signals that other circuits may adopt similar requirements.