Santuario v. Bondi

In Jose Mario Romero Santuario v. Pamela Bondi et al., a Mexican citizen who has lived in the United States since 2004 was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on October 18, 2025, and detained without being given a bond hearing — a proceeding where a judge decides whether a detained person can be released while their immigration case is pending. The government argued it had the authority to hold him under a federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1225) that applies to people 'seeking admission' to the country, which would have allowed mandatory detention without any bond hearing. Petitioner argued he should instead be held under a different law (8 U.S.C. § 1226), which applies to people already living in the country and gives them the right to request a bond hearing.

The court first addressed whether it had the power to hear the case at all. The government argued that a separate law (8 U.S.C. § 1252(g)) stripped courts of authority to review immigration detention decisions. The court disagreed, finding that Petitioner's challenge to the lawfulness of his detention — separate from any challenge to the removal process itself — is a matter courts may properly review. The court then turned to the core question: which detention law applies? The court found that because Petitioner had been living in the United States for over 21 years and was arrested inside the country — not at the border or a port of entry — he was not 'seeking admission' and therefore could not be held under § 1225. The court also rejected the government's reliance on a recent immigration agency ruling (Matter of Yajure Hurtado) that adopted the government's broader interpretation of § 1225, noting that courts are required to apply their own independent legal judgment rather than simply deferring to agency interpretations.

Judge John R. Tunheim granted the petition for a court order to end unlawful detention (known as a writ of habeas corpus), ruling that Petitioner's detention is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226 and that he must be given a bond hearing within 7 days. At that hearing, both sides may present evidence about whether Petitioner poses a danger to the community or is a flight risk. If the government does not hold the bond hearing within 7 days, Petitioner must be immediately released. The court also ordered that Petitioner cannot be moved out of the District of Minnesota before the bond hearing takes place. Petitioner's separate motion for a temporary restraining order was denied as moot because the habeas petition was granted.