Western District of Texas • 5:26-cv-01626

#1

Mar 11, 2026

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ATXWDC-21552233), filed by Ernesto Flores-Hernandez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit ICE Detainee Locator, # 2 Exhibit Notice of Hearing, # 3 Exhibit Notice to Appear, # 4 Exhibit Biographic Information, # 5 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Cote, C.M.) (Entered: 03/11/2026)

Mar 11, 2026

Case assigned to Judge Jason K. Pulliam. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (vl)

Mar 11, 2026

If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Chestney (vl)

Mar 12, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Mar 12, 2026

To be Referred to SA Mag Judge

#2

Mar 13, 2026

Order

#3

Mar 20, 2026

Amended Complaint

#4

Mar 20, 2026

Order

#5

Mar 20, 2026

Certified Mail Receipt

#6

Mar 27, 2026

Response

#7

Mar 31, 2026

Certified Mail Receipt

#8

Apr 16, 2026

Response

#9

May 21, 2026

TEXT ORDER GRANTING 3 AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. Petitioner claims that Respondents have violated procedural due process rights under the Fifth Amendment based on a significant presence in the United States and/or an improper revocation of release. Respondents have submitted a response in opposition. After reviewing the briefing, provided evidence, and applicable law, the Court grants the petition based on the law as set out and analyzed in Longoria Mendoza v. Noem, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, ___, No 5:26-CV-0728-JKP, 2026 WL 809441 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2026) and numerous other cases decided by the undersigned. While there are differences between this case and Longoria Mendoza, none warrant a different result. For reasons previously stated in Longoria Mendoza, the Court finds that (1) it has jurisdiction to consider the arguments presented in the instant habeas petition; (2) any asserted failure to exhaust administrative remedies is excused; (3) Respondents have violated Petitioner's procedural due process rights; and (4) fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 are not available in habeas corpus proceedings like this one. The Court treats the instant action solely as a habeas action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and declines to consider any claim other than the alleged violation of procedural due process. The Court has considered the arguments Respondents make in response and rejects them for reasons stated in prior cases. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court concludes Petitioner's detention is unlawful, and habeas relief is proper. Because Petitioner has no known criminal history, has established a significant presence in the United States that requires due process protection, and there is no indication of flight risk or danger to the community, it is ORDERED that on or before May 23, 2026, Respondents shall RELEASE Petitioner Ernesto Flores-Hernandez from custody to a public location, under appropriate conditions of release. Respondents must NOTIFY Petitioner's counsel of the exact location and exact time of release as soon as practicable and no less than two hours before release. Any possible or anticipated removal or transfer of Petitioner under this present detention is PROHIBITED. No later than the next business day after the ordered release date, Respondents shall FILE a status report to confirm whether Petitioner has been released. If counsel for Petitioner disagrees with any aspect of the filed Status Report, counsel may file a separate Status Report. A written final judgment will be issued separately to summarize the orders of the Court and to close this habeas case. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (rw) (Entered: 05/21/2026)

#10

May 21, 2026

Judgment

May 21, 2026

Order