District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-14109

#1

Sep 08, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-12014539 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Wilfils Pierre. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, I-94, # 2 Category Form, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ciachurski, Julia) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#2

Sep 08, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Julia E. Kobick 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 Paul G. Levenson. (JAM) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#3

Sep 08, 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). (Currie, Haley) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#4

Sep 08, 2026

District Judge Julia E. Kobick: ORDER CONCERNING SERVICE OF PETITION AND STAY OR TRANSFER OF REMOVAL entered.The answer or responsive pleading is due no later than September 15, 2026. (Currie, Haley) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#5

Sep 08, 2026

Copies of the following were mailed to all respondents on 9/8/2026: 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) and 4 Order Concerning Service of Petition and Stay or Transfer of Removal (Currie, Haley) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

Sep 08, 2026

Copy Mailed

Sep 08, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#6

Sep 15, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Vincent Engingro, III on behalf of Todd Blanche, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella, David Wesling (Engingro, Vincent) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#7

Sep 15, 2026

RESPONSE/ANSWER to Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), by Todd Blanche, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella, David Wesling. (Engingro, Vincent) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#8

Sep 15, 2026

District Judge Julia E. Kobick: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. Petitioner Wilfils Pierre, a citizen of Haiti who entered the United States in August 2023, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on September 8, 2026 seeking his immediate release or, alternatively, a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). ECF 1, ¶¶ 1-3, 9. He was arrested and detained by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) on August 31, 2026. Id. ¶ 1. Pierre remains in ICE’s custody at Plymouth County Correctional Facility in Plymouth, Massachusetts. Id. ¶ 6.The respondents acknowledge “that the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those recently addressed by this Court in Rodrigues da Silva v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Civil Action No. 26-cv-13854 (D. Mass. Aug. 25, 2026).” ECF 7, at 1. In that case, the respondents conceded that, based on the First Circuit’s decision in Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz, No. 25-2152, 2026 WL 2352042 (1st Cir. Aug. 13, 2026), “this Court is likely to conclude that Petitioner’s detention is under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and that Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing.” ECF 7, at 2, Rodrigues da Silva, No. 26-cv-13854 (Aug. 25, 2026). So too here.Noncitizens like Pierre “detained under Section 1226(a) have the right to request a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge, at which the government bears the burden to prove that continued detention is justified.” Sampiao v. Hyde, 799 F. Supp. 3d 14, 19-20 (D. Mass. 2025). Bond may be denied only if the government “either (1) prove[s] by clear and convincing evidence that [the noncitizen] poses a danger to the community or (2) prove[s] by a preponderance of the evidence that [the noncitizen] poses a flight risk.” Hernandez-Lara v. Lyons, 10 F.4th 19, 41 (1st Cir. 2021).The Court held in Rodrigues da Silva that dismissal of the habeas petition was not warranted for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Exhaustion may be excused where a petitioner could “‘suffer irreparable harm if unable to secure immediate judicial consideration of his claim.’” Portela-Gonzalez v. Sec’y of the Navy, 109 F.3d 74, 77 (1st Cir. 1997) (quoting McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. 140, 147 (1992)). This includes situations where “the petitione[r] remains detained” pending the exhaustion of administrative remedies. Brito v. Garland, 22 F.4th 240, 256 (1st Cir. 2021). Here, as in Rodrigues da Silva, the respondents make no assurances that Pierre would receive a bond hearing within a reasonable period of time—i.e., one week—once requested. Absent such assurances, waiver of the exhaustion requirement is warranted because Pierre, who remains in ICE custody, is likely to experience irreparable harm to his liberty while awaiting that hearing. SeeSampiao, 799 F. Supp. 3d at 25-26. Pierre is therefore entitled to a bond hearing, as the respondents admit. ECF 7, at 1.For the foregoing reasons, Pierre’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, ECF 1, is GRANTED. The respondents are ORDERED to provide him with a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within 7 days of this Order. The respondents are further ORDERED to file a status report within 24 hours of the Immigration Judge’s decision on bond, stating whether Pierre has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial, or whether she has been released, and if so, the date, time, and location of his release. The respondents should include a copy of the Immigration Judge’s decision with their status report. (Currie, Haley) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

Sep 15, 2026

Order