Western District of New York • 1:26-cv-00026

#1

Jan 06, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5674136.), filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 01/06/2026)

Jan 07, 2026

Case Assigned to Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. Notification to Chambers of on-line civil case opening. (TMK)

Jan 07, 2026

Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (TMK)

#2

Jan 08, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne. To maintain the status quo, and solely so that the Court can make an informed decision about its authority to issue relief and whether any relief that it has the power to issue should be granted, the respondents are temporarily enjoined from removing the petitioner from the United States. Additionally, so that the petitioner can fully participate in these proceedings and maintain adequate access to legal counsel, the respondents also are enjoined from transferring the petitioner to any district outside the Western District of New York. See Perez y Perez v. Noem, 2025 WL 1908284, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 13, 2025) (collecting cases). On November 4, 2025, this Court issued a decision and order in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, case number 25-cv-960, finding that noncitizens who are present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled are not subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) but instead are subject to detention under section 1226. See Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, --- F.Supp.3d ---, 2025 WL 3085032 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 4, 2025). The Court further held "that constitutional due process requires the government to bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the individual is either a danger to the community or a flight risk even at an initial bond hearing under section 1226(a)." Id. at *12. Accordingly, the respondents are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before January 15, 2026, why, in light of that decision, (1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not order that the petitioner receive a bond hearing at which the government bears the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk and at which the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 1/8/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 01/08/2026)

#3

Jan 13, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam A. Khalil on behalf of Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 01/13/2026)

#4

Jan 13, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 2 Text Order,,,,,,,, filed by Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 01/13/2026)

#5

Jan 13, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne. On January 8, 2026, this Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of its decision in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, --- F.Supp.3d ---, 2025 WL 3085032 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 4, 2025), "(1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not order that the petitioner receive a bond hearing at which the government bears the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk and at which the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay." Docket Item 2. In response, the "[r]espondents acknowledge[d] that this Court's prior rulings [including Alvarez Ortiz] concerning similar challenges to the government policy or practice at issue in this case, and the common question of law between this case and those rulings, would control the result in this case should the Court adhere to its legal reasoning in those prior decisions." Docket Item 4 at 1. The respondents have reserved all rights, including the right to appeal, and this Court appreciates their efforts "to conserve judicial and party resources" by not rehashing issues that this Court already has decided. See id. Accordingly, for the reasons explained in Alvarez Ortiz, this Court GRANTS the petition and ORDERS the respondents to provide the petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge within seven calendar days of the date of this order. At that hearing, the government shall bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk. At that bond hearing, the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. If the respondents fail to provide such a hearing within seven calendar days, they shall immediately release the petitioner. On or before January 22, 2026, the respondents shall file a status report confirming that the petitioner has either been granted a bond hearing in compliance with this order or released from custody. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 1/13/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 01/13/2026)

#6

Jan 22, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney re bond hearing. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 01/22/2026)

#7

Jan 22, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 6 Letter filed by Kristi Noem, Tammy Marich, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons. The respondents have filed a letter, Docket Item 6, indicating that an immigration judge held a bond hearing in compliance with this Court's order, Docket Item 5, but found that the government met its burden on risk of flight. If the petitioner believes there are any further issues properly before this Court, the petitioner may show cause within 14 days of this order. If the petitioner does not show cause why issues remain before this Court within 14 days, the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and close this case without further order. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 1/22/2026. (RFI)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 01/22/2026)

#8

Feb 02, 2026

MOTION to Enforce Judgment by Abdoul Aziz Denne. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Harith Mazrui, # 2 Exhibit Leaked e-mail of Chief Immigration Judge)(Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#9

Feb 02, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne. Response due by 2/9/2026. Reply due by 2/17/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 2/2/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#10

Feb 04, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney in response to Motion to Enforce. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#11

Feb 04, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The petitioner, Abdoul Aziz Denne, has moved to enforce, Docket Item 8, this Court's order requiring a bond hearing at which the government was to "bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that [Denne] is a danger to the community or a flight risk," see Docket Item 5 . More specifically, Denne says that the bond hearing he received "did not comport with due process" and this Court's order. See Docket Item 8 at 9, 11. Denne asks the Court to "find that [the r]espondents are not in compliance with" the Court's order and order his immediate release. See id. at 11. In response, "the [respondents] concede[] that the immigration judge at the bond hearing undertook his own questioning of... Denne, potentially shifting the burden off of the government and/or failing to hold the government to prove its case by the clear and convincing standard." Docket Item 10 . The respondents "submit[] that the proper remedy is to order a new bond hearing with clarifying instructions as opposed to granting outright release." Id. In light of the government's concession, the Court agrees that a new bond hearing with clarifying instructions is necessary. Denne's motion to enforce, Docket Item 8, is therefore GRANTED IN PART. Within seven calendar days of the date of this order, the respondents shall hold a new bond hearing for Denne that complies with this Court's order of January 13, 2026, see Docket Item 5 . At that hearing, the immigration judge shall address whether the government has established by clear and convincing evidence that Denne is a danger to the community or a flight risk. Moreover, the immigration judge also must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, Denne's ability to pay. The immigration judge must do more than simply pay lip service to those requirements: if the immigration judge decides not to change Denne's custody status, the immigration judge must address and explain why the government has established by clear and convincing evidence that this particular petitioner, as opposed to any detained noncitizen, poses a risk of flight or danger and why alternatives to detention would not ameliorate that risk for this particular petitioner. If the respondents do not provide Denne with such a hearing within seven calendar days, they shall immediately release him. On or before 2/12/2026, the respondents shall file a status report confirming that Denne has either been granted a new bond hearing as described above or released from custody. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 2/4/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#12

Feb 12, 2026

Letter filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne with status update on bond hearing. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Transcript of Portion of Bond Proceedings)(Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

#13

Feb 12, 2026

CONTINUATION OF EXHIBITS to 12 Letter IJ Order Granting Bond. (Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

#14

Feb 17, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The petitioner has filed a letter, Docket Item 12, and supplemental submission, Docket Item 13, indicating that an immigration judge held a bond hearing in compliance with this Court's order, Docket Item 11, and that the petitioner was ordered released on bond. If the petitioner believes there are any further issues properly before this Court, the petitioner may show cause within 14 days of this order. If the petitioner does not show cause why issues remain before this Court within 14 days, the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and close this case without further order. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 2/17/2026. (ZHM)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#15

Feb 20, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne. Virtual Oral Argument set for 2/25/2026 at 1:00 PM in U.S. District Court, Niagara Courtroom, 8th Floor West, 2 Niagara Square, Buffalo, NY before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. PLEASE NOTE: The proceeding described herein will be held remotely. Dial-in instructions will be emailed directly to the parties. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 2/20/2026. (CMD) (Entered: 02/20/2026)

Feb 23, 2026

E-Filing Notification: Document filed in wrong case. Disregard docket entry. 15 TEXT ORDER re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Abdoul Aziz Denne. Virtual Oral Argument set for 2/25/2026 at 1:00 PM in U.S. District Court, Niagara Courtroom, 8th Floor West, 2 Niagara Square, Buffalo, NY before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. PLEASE NOTE: The proceeding described herein will be held remotely. Dial-in instructions will be emailed directly to the parties. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 2/20/2026. (CMD) (CMD)