Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Guerson Toussaint, a Haitian citizen in removal proceedings, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking release from immigration custody. He was not subject to a final removal order, and the parties had not reported that he had been removed or otherwise released.
The district court recognized that it had jurisdiction to review a § 2241 challenge to pre-removal-order immigration detention. Toussaint’s claims concerned whether he was entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and whether his detention violated due process.
The Court’s Holding
The court denied the habeas petition. Applying the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, it held that Toussaint was subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), rather than discretionary detention under § 1226(a), because he had not shown that he was “clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted.” That precedent foreclosed his claim to a bond hearing under § 1226(a).
The court also held that the Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision in Sosnava Rodriguez v. Vergara foreclosed the argument that mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A) violated Toussaint’s due process rights. It denied all pending motions as moot and ordered the case closed. The court additionally stated that if Toussaint had since received a final removal order, been removed, or been released, the petition was denied as moot.
Key Takeaways
- A federal district court may exercise § 2241 jurisdiction over a constitutional or statutory challenge to pre-removal-order immigration detention.
- Under controlling Fifth Circuit precedent, a person in removal proceedings who cannot show a clear entitlement to admission is subject to mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A), not a bond hearing under § 1226(a).
- Controlling en banc Fifth Circuit precedent foreclosed Toussaint’s due process challenge to detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A).
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how the Fifth Circuit’s 2026 immigration-detention rulings constrain habeas relief in district courts throughout Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. For similarly situated noncitizens without final removal orders, arguments seeking § 1226(a) bond hearings or asserting that mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A) itself violates due process are foreclosed by binding circuit precedent.