Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Miguel Eduardo Lopez, a citizen of El Salvador, entered the United States without inspection in approximately December 2004. After an aggravated-assault conviction and a six-month prison sentence, he received a notice to appear and was released on bond in 2017. ICE detained him again in June 2026 while his removal proceedings remained pending.
Lopez petitioned for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, seeking an individualized bond hearing. The government moved for summary judgment, arguing that 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) required Lopez’s detention without such a hearing.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that Lopez’s failure to pursue administrative remedies did not bar review because exhaustion would have been futile. A precedential Board of Immigration Appeals decision establishes that immigration judges lack authority to grant bond to people present in the country without admission and detained under Section 1225(b)(2), and the BIA cannot adjudicate constitutional claims.
On the merits, the court held that Fifth Circuit precedent required mandatory detention under Section 1225(b)(2)(A). Because Lopez entered without inspection, had not been admitted or paroled, and did not claim that he was clearly entitled to admission, he qualified as an applicant for admission subject to detention during removal proceedings. The court also rejected any implied procedural or substantive due-process challenge, denied the habeas petition with prejudice, and granted the government summary judgment.
Key Takeaways
- Under controlling Fifth Circuit precedent, a noncitizen who entered without inspection may be mandatorily detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), even after living in the United States for years.
- Administrative exhaustion was excused because binding BIA precedent foreclosed the requested bond hearing and the BIA lacked authority to decide constitutional claims.
- Lopez was not entitled to an individualized bond hearing, and the court found no procedural or substantive due-process violation.
Why It Matters
The decision applies the Fifth Circuit’s interpretation of Section 1225(b)(2)(A) to deny bond hearings for noncitizens who entered without inspection and are awaiting removal proceedings. It also indicates that habeas petitioners may bypass administrative exhaustion when binding agency precedent makes the requested relief unavailable, while still losing on the merits under controlling circuit law.