Western District of Texas • 5:26-cv-04286

#1

Jul 09, 2026

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241 AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WITHIN THREE DAYS ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ATXWDC-22269623), filed by Carlos Manuel Sanchez Amaya. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Thompson, Rose) (Entered: 07/09/2026)

Jul 10, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Jul 10, 2026

To be Referred to SA Mag Judge

#2

Jul 13, 2026

Order

Jul 13, 2026

Order

#4

Jul 20, 2026

Response

#5

Jul 22, 2026

Response

#6

Oct 15, 2026

TEXT ORDER GRANTING 1 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, 823 F. Supp. 3d 636 (W.D. Tex. 2026) and numerous other cases decided by the undersigned. While there are differences between this case and Longoria Mendoza, none warrant a different result. The Court notes the en banc Fifth Circuit has stayed the district-court judgments pending rehearing in Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega, 183 F.4th 387, 388 (5th Cir. 2026) (per curiam). To the extent the Government might contend that this stay prevents district courts from granting habeas relief on procedural-due-process grounds while rehearing is pending, this Court does not read the order so broadly. The Court is unaware of any Fifth Circuit decision or order holding that the stay categorically bars adjudication of, or relief on, such claims. Other courts have continued to consider due-process claims under pre-panel-decision analyses, including Perozo-Mata v. Blanche, No. 4:26-CV-05679, 2026 WL 2195373, at *3 (S.D. Tex. July 27, 2026)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. Indeed, the Court's decision rests entirely on the claim premised on the improper revocation of Petitioners prior release. There is no indication that, at the time of his detention, Petitioner was not complying with the terms of his prior release. 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, had been complying with the terms of a prior release, and there is no indication of flight risk or danger to the community, it is ORDERED that on or before October 17, 2026, Respondents shall RELEASE Petitioner Carlos Manuel Sanchez Amaya from custody to a public location, under conditions no more restrictive than those in place before the detention at issue. 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: 10/15/2026)

#7

Oct 15, 2026

FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of Carlos Manuel Sanchez Amaya-- 1. On or before October 17, 2026, Respondents shall RELEASE Petitioner Carlos Manuel Sanchez Amaya from custody to a public location under conditions no more restrictive than those in place before the detention at issue. 2. Respondents must NOTIFY Petitioners counsel of the exact location and exact time of release as soon as practicable and no less than two hours before release. 3. Any possible or anticipated removal or transfer of Petitioner under this present detention is PROHIBITED. 4. 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. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (bt) (Entered: 10/15/2026)

Oct 15, 2026

Order