Reported / Citable
Background
Eliezer Antonio Salazar Crespo, a Venezuelan national, entered the United States near Eagle Pass, Texas, in April 2022. Immigration authorities released him on humanitarian parole, and he lived in Dallas until ICE arrested him during a routine check-in on September 4, 2025. He alleged that ICE detained him without a warrant or advance notice that his parole was being revoked or that removal proceedings were commencing.
Salazar filed a habeas petition challenging his re-arrest and detention on due-process grounds and sought release. The magistrate judge twice recommended temporary relief, but later held those recommendations in abeyance after the Fifth Circuit issued Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi. Salazar did not submit the ordered supplemental briefing. The government subsequently reported that the Board of Immigration Appeals had summarily dismissed his appeal and that he was removed to Venezuela on April 1, 2026. His counsel confirmed the removal and requested dismissal of the petition as moot.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Richard B. Farrer concluded that Salazar’s removal eliminated the live controversy underlying his habeas petition. Because the petition challenged his detention and requested release, the court could no longer grant the requested relief after he had been removed to Venezuela. The report therefore recommended dismissing the petition as moot for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The magistrate judge withdrew the two earlier reports and recommendations concerning temporary relief. He further recommended that, subject to the district judge’s adoption of the report, Salazar’s motion for a temporary restraining order, motion to stay removal, and motion to adopt the magistrate’s decision should be moot.
Key Takeaways
- A habeas challenge to immigration detention becomes moot when the petitioner has been removed and the requested release can no longer be effected.
- The filing is a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, not a final dismissal order by the district judge.
- The magistrate judge withdrew his prior recommendations for temporary relief and recommended that the three related motions should be moot, rather than denied as moot.
Why It Matters
The recommendation illustrates Article III’s continuing-case-or-controversy requirement in immigration habeas litigation. Once removal made Salazar’s requested release unavailable, the federal court no longer had jurisdiction over his detention challenge.
It also underscores the importance of procedural posture: the magistrate judge recommended dismissal and returned the case to the district court, which would decide whether to adopt the recommendation after the objection period.