Hakan K. v. Noem
Hakan K. v. Kristi Noem, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in her official capacity; Todd M. Lyons, Acting Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in his official capacity; Peter Berg, Director, St. Paul Field Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in his official capacity; Samuel J. Olson, Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, Chicago Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Mellissa Harper, Louisiana Field Office Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in her official capacity; and Eleazar Garcia, Warden of the Alexandria Staging Center, Alexandria, Louisiana, in his official capacity.
- Jeffrey Bryan
- 0:25-cv-04722
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 6
In Hakan K. v. Kristi Noem, Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota granted an emergency temporary restraining order blocking the federal government from deporting a Turkish asylum seeker who was transferred to Louisiana and may have unknowingly signed a voluntary deportation document.
Non-citizens in immigration detention who were originally released on bond under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 but have been re-detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225, particularly those with pending asylum applications facing imminent removal. Also relevant to immigration attorneys and DHS/ICE officials in the District of Minnesota and potentially beyond.
What happened
In Hakan K. v. Kristi Noem, Hakan K. is a Turkish national who entered the United States in 2023, was released on bond while his immigration case was pending, and filed an application for asylum that has not yet been decided. He has no criminal history, has never missed a court hearing, and holds a valid work permit. On December 1, 2025, immigration officials arrested him in a Home Depot parking lot — allegedly based on his perceived ethnicity — and then transferred him to a facility in Alexandria, Louisiana, which his attorneys describe as a staging location for deportation flights. He also alleged that, because of his limited English, he may have mistakenly signed a voluntary deportation document believing it was a bond release form.
Hakan K. asked the court for an emergency temporary restraining order — a short-term court order meant to preserve the situation as it is while the underlying legal dispute is resolved — to stop the government from deporting him while his case proceeds. His main legal argument is that the government is detaining him under the wrong immigration law: he was originally released on bond under one statute (8 U.S.C. § 1226), but the government is now holding him under a different, stricter statute (8 U.S.C. § 1225) that requires mandatory detention without bond. He argues this switch is unlawful.
Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan granted the emergency temporary restraining order after weighing four factors: the likelihood of irreparable harm to Hakan K., the balance of hardships between the parties, the likelihood that Hakan K. will succeed on the legal merits, and the public interest. The court found that deportation would cause irreparable harm by cutting off his access to his lawyers, mooting his pending asylum application, and potentially exposing him to persecution. The court found no identifiable harm to the government from a temporary pause on deportation. The court noted that courts have rejected the government's legal basis for detention in nearly 300 similar cases, making it likely Hakan K. will succeed on the merits. Finally, the court found that the public interest in due process and the rule of law outweighs the public interest in proceeding with deportation. The order takes effect immediately and expires in fourteen days unless Hakan K. shows good cause for an extension.
The detailed version
- Hakan K. v. Kristi Noem, et al., File No. 25-CV-4722 (JMB/DTS)
- Jeffrey M. Bryan
- December 23, 2025
Parties
Petitioner Hakan K. is a Turkish national currently detained at the Alexandria Staging Center in Alexandria, Louisiana. Respondents are senior officials of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), including Secretary Kristi Noem, Acting ICE Director Todd M. Lyons, and several field office directors and the warden of the detention facility.
Background
Hakan K. entered the United States in October 2023. Upon entry he was taken into custody and then released on bond under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which governs detention of non-citizens pending a final removal decision. On December 6, 2023, he filed an application for asylum and withholding of removal to Turkey, which remains pending. His removal hearing was scheduled for March 12, 2026. He has no criminal history, has never missed a hearing, and holds a valid work permit.
On December 1, 2025, ICE officers arrested Hakan K. in a Home Depot parking lot, reportedly without providing a reason and allegedly based on his perceived ethnicity. He was initially held in Minnesota and then transferred to the Alexandria Staging Center in Louisiana — a facility his attorneys characterize as a staging point for deportation flights. The government is detaining him under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2), a mandatory detention provision applicable to certain arriving non-citizens, rather than under § 1226, the provision under which he was originally released on bond. Hakan K. contends this reclassification is unlawful.
On December 22, 2025, Hakan K. filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), a court order that temporarily halts specific actions to preserve the status quo while litigation continues. His motion alleged that his transfer to Louisiana indicated imminent deportation and that, due to limited English proficiency, he may have unknowingly signed a voluntary deportation document while believing he was signing a bond release form.
Legal Standard
The court applied the four-factor Dataphase test (from Dataphase Sys., Inc. v. C L Sys., Inc., 640 F.2d 109 (8th Cir. 1981)), which courts in the Eighth Circuit use for both TROs and preliminary injunctions: (1) threat of irreparable harm to the movant; (2) balance of harms between the parties; (3) probability of success on the merits; and (4) the public interest. No single factor is determinative; courts weigh all circumstances flexibly. The petitioner bears the burden.
Threshold Jurisdiction Issue
The court addressed whether Hakan K.'s physical transfer to Louisiana divested the Minnesota court of jurisdiction over his habeas petition (a petition challenging the lawfulness of his detention). Citing Weeks v. Wyrick, 638 F.2d 690, 692 (8th Cir. 1981), the court held that a transfer occurring after the petition was filed does not strip the court of jurisdiction.
Analysis of TRO Factors
1. Irreparable Harm: The court found concrete and imminent irreparable harm. Deportation would (a) sever Hakan K.'s access to his retained counsel, (b) prevent him from participating in ongoing litigation, and (c) render his pending asylum application moot — harms that cannot be undone after the fact. The court also noted concern that he could face severe persecution if removed, though it acknowledged insufficient information at this stage to assess that risk concretely.
2. Balance of Harms: The court found no identifiable harm to the government from a temporary pause on deportation. The court cited Nebraska v. Biden, 52 F.4th 1044 (8th Cir. 2022), for the proposition that equities favor an injunction when the challenged action's impact is irreversible compared to the minimal burden an injunction imposes.
3. Likelihood of Success on the Merits: The court found Hakan K. is very likely to succeed on his argument that detention under § 1225 is unlawful for someone previously released under § 1226. The court cited Fuentes v. Olson, No. 25-CV-4456 (LMP/ECW), 2025 WL 3524455 (D. Minn. Dec. 9, 2025), noting that courts have rejected the government's mandatory-detention scheme under these circumstances nearly 300 times.
4. Public Interest: The court found the public interest in enforcing deportation is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring due process, access to judicial review, and adherence to the rule of law.
Bond
The court waived the security bond that is typically required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) when a TRO is issued. The court reasoned that the TRO seeks to prevent constitutional deprivations, respondents face no identifiable monetary loss, and the matter involves important public interests.
Order
The court granted the TRO. Respondents — and any other person or agency acting on their behalf — are prohibited from removing, transferring, or facilitating the removal of Hakan K. from the United States. The order takes effect immediately and expires in fourteen days unless Hakan K. shows good cause for an extension, in which case the court will set a briefing schedule.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.