District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-12155

#1

May 12, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11739598 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Edgar Roberto Navas Aguirre. (Attachments: # 1 Category Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Nader, Eliana) (Entered: 05/12/2026)

#2

May 13, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley. (LBO) (Entered: 05/13/2026)

#3

May 13, 2026

General Order 19-02, dated June 1, 2019 regarding Public Access to Immigration Cases Restricted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c). (EZG) (Entered: 05/13/2026)

#4

May 13, 2026

Service Order-2241 Petition

May 13, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#5

May 14, 2026

Notice - Other

#6

May 27, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#7

May 27, 2026

Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

#8

May 29, 2026

Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

#9

Jun 03, 2026

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered ALLOWING 8 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to June 3, 2026 to File Response/Reply as to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241). Responses due by 6/3/2026. (SEC) (Entered: 06/03/2026)

#10

Jun 03, 2026

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered DENYING as moot 7 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to May 29, 2026 to File Response/Reply to Habeas Petition. (SEC) (Entered: 06/03/2026)

#11

Jun 03, 2026

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

#12

Jun 03, 2026

Response to Court Order

Jun 03, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

Jun 03, 2026

Response to Court Order

#13

Jun 12, 2026

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) filed by Edgar Roberto Navas Aguirre. Having reviewed the petition for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the "Petition") filed by Petitioner Edgar Roberto Navas Aguirre ("Petitioner"), D. 1, and Respondents' response to same, D. 11, the Court ALLOWS the Petition insofar as it sought a bond hearing/individualized custody redetermination before an immigration judge under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the government bears the burden of proving Petitioner poses a danger to the community or flight risk, see Hernandez-Lara v. Lyons, 10 F.4th 19, 41 (1st Cir. 2021), which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial.Factual Background.Petitioner is a forty-three-year-old noncitizen from Guatemala currently detained in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). D. 1 ¶¶ 1, 15, 22. Petitioner entered the United States without inspection in approximately 1996. Id. ¶¶ 1, 5, 22. On or about May 12, 2026, Petitioner was detained by ICE. Id. ¶¶ 1-2, 26. As alleged, Petitioner has no criminal convictions and no prior removal order. Id. ¶¶ 6-7, 24, 28-29. Petitioner alleges that his custody is properly governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). Id. ¶¶ 9-10. He contends that his detention without a bond hearing is, therefore, unlawful, including because it violates his rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, id. ¶¶ 36-50, and is contrary to statute, id. ¶¶ 31-35. The Petition also includes counts asserting violations of the Fourth Amendment, id. ¶¶ 51-53, and a statute regarding immigration arrests, id. ¶¶ 54-55, but does not include any factual allegations supporting those counts. Petitioner seeks a bond hearing. Id. ¶ 11. Discussion. At the time the Petition was filed, it alleged upon information and belief that Petitioner was detained in this district. Id. ¶¶ 3-4, 14-15. Respondents subsequently notified the Court that Petitioner was transferred to a detention facility in Rhode Island, D. 5 at 1, but they have not suggested such transfer occurred before the Petition was filed or that this Court otherwise lacks jurisdiction, see generally id.; D. 11. Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction over the Petition as it concerns relief that Petitioner seeks challenging his continued detention. Kong v. United States, 62 F.4th 608, 614 (1st Cir. 2023) (noting that "we have held that district courts retain jurisdiction over challenges to the legality of detention in the immigration context").Consistent with this Court's prior rulings, including and not limited to Da Silva v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-12672, 2025 WL 2969163, at *2 (D. Mass. Oct. 21, 2025), and Dias de Carvalho v. Hyde, 25-cv-12677-DJC (D. Mass. Nov. 4, 2025), D. 14, the Court agrees with Petitioner that his custody is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (which allows for discretionary determinations of custody before an immigration judge) and not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) (which provides for mandatory detention for "applicants for admission"), as Respondents contend, see D. 11 at 1 n.2; see also Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 289 (2018) (discussing the distinction). Respondents submit that this Court's decision in Dias de Carvalho is likely dispositive here. See D. 11 at 1. Thus, the Court concludes that Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). See Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden, 175 F.4th 61, 71 (2d Cir. 2026) (affirming that petitioner's detention "is governed by Section 1226 and that he is entitled to a bond hearing . . . consistent with the decisions of . . . over ninety percent of district court judges").Accordingly, the Court ALLOWS the Petition, D. 1, insofar as it sought a bond hearing/individualized custody redetermination under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the government bears the burden of proving Petitioner poses a danger to the community or flight risk, see Hernandez-Lara, 10 F.4th at 41, which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial. (SEC) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

Jun 12, 2026

Order

#14

Jun 18, 2026

Status Report

#15

Jun 22, 2026

Order Dismissing Case