Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Petitioner Johantony Jesus Deroy Deroy, a Venezuelan citizen, entered the United States at the Brownsville, Texas port of entry on November 21, 2023. DHS inspected and paroled him into the country the same day, serving a Notice to Appear charging removability under INA § 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) for lacking valid entry documents. Petitioner filed applications for asylum and withholding of removal, obtained work authorization, worked in catering, and paid taxes while his immigration proceedings remained pending.
In September 2026, ICE detained Petitioner at a military base where he was working as a contractor. The arrest occurred without a warrant, prior notice, a pre-deprivation hearing, or any opportunity to be heard. Petitioner was held at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center. On October 8, 2026, he filed a § 2241 habeas petition alleging due process and INA violations and seeking immediate release. The court issued a briefing schedule requiring Respondents to file a notice of appearance within three days and an answer within seven days. Respondents filed neither, and the petition proceeded unopposed.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted the petition and ordered Petitioner's immediate release. It held that Respondents' failure to oppose the petition despite a court-ordered briefing schedule constituted an effective concession that the requested relief should be granted, citing multiple Central District of California decisions treating non-opposition as a concession in similar habeas cases. The court also relied on its prior rulings in Andres v. Semaia, Gallosa-Zapata v. Warden, and Rivera Castaño v. Blanche, which found that similarly situated individuals re-detained without due process were entitled to immediate release.
The order requires Respondents to release Petitioner (A# 244-275-551) immediately subject to the conditions of his most recent order of supervision, if any, without imposing new restraints such as reporting requirements, GPS, or electronic monitoring. Respondents are enjoined from re-detaining Petitioner absent strict compliance with due process and all applicable statutes and regulations. The court further ordered Respondents to file a declaration by 5:00 p.m. on October 22, 2026, confirming Petitioner's release.
Key Takeaways
- Respondents' complete failure to respond to a court-ordered briefing schedule in a § 2241 habeas case operates as a concession of the petitioner's due process claims.
- The court applied precedent from Andres, Gallosa-Zapata, and Rivera Castaño holding that re-detention of paroled asylum seekers without a warrant, notice, or hearing violates due process.
- The release order prohibits not only continued detention but also the imposition of new supervision conditions such as GPS monitoring or reporting requirements beyond the petitioner's most recent order of supervision.
- The court mandated a compliance declaration within two days, underscoring the urgency of release in unopposed habeas cases.
- The decision reflects a pattern in the Central District of California of granting habeas relief for ICE re-detention of paroled noncitizens absent due process.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces the procedural consequence of government non-participation in habeas proceedings: non-opposition is treated as a concession warranting immediate relief. It also affirms the substantive due process right of paroled asylum seekers not to be re-detained without a warrant, notice, and a hearing. The injunction against re-detention without full due process compliance and the prohibition on new electronic monitoring conditions provide practical protection beyond mere release. The ruling aligns with a growing body of Central District case law scrutinizing ICE's re-detention practices for individuals previously paroled into the United States pending immigration proceedings.