Western District of New York • 1:26-cv-01559

#1

Jul 30, 2026

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5921708.), filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 07/30/2026)

#2

Jul 31, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski.So that the petitioner can fully participate in these proceedings and maintain adequate access to legal counsel, the respondents 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). In Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden, 175 F.4th 61 (2d Cir. 2026), the Second Circuit held 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. And in Cabrera Martinez v. Marich, 816 F. Supp. 3d 356 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), this Court held that detention of noncitizens who have remained in the country following expiration of parole is under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, not section 1225. Additionally, this Court held in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, 808 F. Supp. 3d 579 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), "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 598. It appears that the holdings of Barbosa da Cunha, Alvarez Ortiz and/or Cabrera Martinez may apply to the petitioner in this case. Accordingly, the respondents are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before 8/7/2026, why, in light of those decisions, (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. The petitioner also argues that he was arrested without a warrant and therefore is entitled to immediate release. In Last Name Unknown v. Ball, 2026 WL 2096666, at *4 (W.D.N.Y. July 21, 2026), this Court held that a petitioner whose detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) was entitled to immediate release when a warrant had not been obtained for his arrest. Accordingly, the respondents also shall SHOW CAUSE on or before 8/7/2026 why the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release under this Court's decision in Last Name Unknown, including providing a copy of any warrant that the respondents say was issued. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/31/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

#3

Jul 31, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance of Government Attorney: Adam A. Khalil, appearing on behalf of Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

#4

Jul 31, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 2 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,, filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

#5

Jul 31, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski. On 7/31/2026, this Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of this Court's decision in Last Name Unknown v. Ball, 2026 WL 2096666 (W.D.N.Y. July 21, 2026), "the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release...[,] including providing a copy of any warrant that the respondents say was issued." Docket Item 5 . In response, the respondents said that the petitioner's argument that he is entitled to immediate release "should be rejected because immigration officers have the ability to arrest [noncitizens] who are present unlawfully within the United States without an arrest warrant" under 8 U.S.C. § 1357. See Docket Item 4 at 5. But as the Court noted in Last Name Unknown, section 1357 only provides "limited authority to conduct warrantless arrests." See 2026 WL 2096666, at *2 (quoting Sisalema Rea v. Ball, 2026 WL 1959270, at *2 (N.D.N.Y. July 2, 2026)). More specifically, "to lawfully arrest a noncitizen who falls under section 1226(a) without a warrant, the arresting official must have reason to believe that the noncitizen is (1) present in the United States illegally and (2) likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained." See id. at *3. Accordingly, on or before 8/7/2026, the respondents shall supplement their response, Docket Item 4, to identify how and why the arresting official in this instance had reason to believe that the petitioner was both present in the United States illegally and likely to escape before a warrant could have been obtained. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/31/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

Jul 31, 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. 636(c) 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. (MMG)

Jul 31, 2026

Case assigned to Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. Notification to chambers of online civil opening. (MMG)

#6

Aug 04, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 5 Text Order,,,,,,, filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

#7

Aug 05, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The respondents have filed a letter "withdraw[ing] their claim that the [petitioner's] arrest was made pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1357." Docket Item 6. Accordingly, on or before 8/7/2026, the respondents shall verify whether a warrant was issued for the petitioner's arrest. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/5/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#8

Aug 05, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella with Form I-200, Warrant for Arrest of Alien. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#9

Aug 05, 2026

Letter filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski requesting order to provide declaration on the time of warrant issuance. (Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#10

Aug 05, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 9 Letter filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski. The petitioner's request "the Court issue an order requiring the [r]espondents to provide a declaration as to when the warrant was issued" is GRANTED. The respondents shall provide the declaration by 8/7/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/5/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#11

Aug 07, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella with DO Dec. re: timing of warrant. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#12

Aug 07, 2026

Letter filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski requesting production of additional documentation. (Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#13

Aug 07, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella with NTA and Form I-213. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#14

Aug 07, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting in part 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski. On July 31, 2026, this Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of this Court's decision in Cabrera Martinez v. Marich, 816 F. Supp. 3d 356 (W.D.N.Y. 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 ruling [in Cabrera Martinez] concern[ed] a similar challenge to the government policy or practice at issue in this case, and if the Court follows that prior ruling, it would control the result in this case." Docket Item 4 at 2. 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. at 1. Accordingly, for the reasons explained in Cabrera Martinez, this Court GRANTS the petition in part 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 8/17/2026, 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. The Court will reserve decision on the issue of the petitioner's entitlement to immediate release. If the petitioner would like to submit anything further in support of that argument and in response to the respondents' letter, Docket Item 13, he may do so on or before 8/11/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/7/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#15

Aug 10, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 13 Letter filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski. (Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 08/10/2026)

#16

Aug 10, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 15 Reply/Response filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/10/2026)

#17

Aug 10, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 16 Reply/Response filed by Dzmitry Kilcheuski. (Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 08/10/2026)

#18

Aug 12, 2026

TEXT ORDER. Virtual Status Conference set for 8/12/2026 at 3:00 PM in U.S. District Court, Niagara Courtroom, 8th Floor West, 2 Niagara Square, Buffalo, NY before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/12/2026. (CMD) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

#19

Aug 12, 2026

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo: Status Conference held on 8/12/2026. Court ordered that this proceeding is not to be recorded, or taped in any way. If someone does record it, they will be found in contempt of court. Court heard from the parties re: dispute as to definition of what arrest means in this case. Respondents' declaration re: when warrant was issued due by 8/14/2026. Petitioner's response due by 8/21/2026. Respondent's reply due by 8/28/2026. Appearances by Teams Video Conference. For petitioner: Matthew K. Borowski. For respondent: AUSA Adam Khalil. (Court Reporter Laurel Tubbs.) (CMD) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

#20

Aug 14, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella with DO Dec re issuance of warrant. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/14/2026)

#21

Aug 17, 2026

Letter filed by Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney, David Venturella re bond hearing. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/17/2026)

#22

Aug 17, 2026

CONTINUATION OF EXHIBITS to 21 Letter (bond order). (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 08/17/2026)