Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Petitioner Slokowsky Asor Laguerre is a native of Haiti who entered the United States on September 7, 2023, and was paroled into the country pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5). An immigration judge terminated removal proceedings against him in October 2023 without appeal. In October 2025, Laguerre applied for asylum, and his application remains pending.
On September 24, 2026, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detained Laguerre while he was working at a car wash in El Cajon, California, and confined him at the Otay Mesa Detention Center. Laguerre filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, alleging that Respondents failed to provide advance written notice of his re-detention, a meaningful opportunity to be heard, and an individualized custody determination before a neutral decisionmaker. In their Return, Respondents acknowledged Laguerre’s prior humanitarian parole and conceded they had insufficient information regarding the termination of that parole under 8 C.F.R. § 212.5(e)(2). While maintaining the position that Laguerre is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), Respondents acknowledged that the Court’s prior decisions control the outcome and deferred to the Court on the appropriate relief.
The Court’s Holding
The Court granted the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Adopting its reasoning in prior cases—including Rivera v. Warden, Besalti v. LaRose, Singh v. LaRose, Ramales v.
LaRose, and Minhas v. Bondi—the Court held that a prior grant of humanitarian parole creates a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause. Because Laguerre had been previously paroled and his parole had not been properly terminated under applicable regulations, due process required his release. The Court ordered Respondents to immediately release Laguerre from custody, subject to any conditions of his prior parole that existed at the time of re-detention. The parties were ordered to file a Joint Status Report by October 20, 2026, confirming release, and the Clerk was directed to close the case.
Key Takeaways
- A prior grant of humanitarian parole under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5) creates a constitutionally protected liberty interest that triggers due process protections upon re-detention.
- The government must comply with regulatory procedures for terminating parole, specifically 8 C.F.R. § 212.5(e)(2), before re-detaining a parolee.
- Respondents conceded they lacked sufficient information regarding the termination of Petitioner’s parole, undermining their mandatory detention argument under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A).
- The Court applied its established precedent in the Southern District of California holding that discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), not mandatory detention under § 1225(b), governs when noncitizens already within the United States are arrested and detained.
- The Court ordered immediate release subject to prior parole conditions and required a joint status report confirming compliance within one week.
Why It Matters
For immigration practitioners, the order treats an existing parole grant and the government’s inability to document proper termination as decisive due-process facts. The remedy was immediate release on the prior parole conditions, not a new bond hearing. The order also imposed a concrete compliance deadline: the parties had to report by October 20, 2026, confirming release.
Laguerre entered in 2023 and received humanitarian parole. After earlier removal proceedings ended and an asylum application remained pending, ICE detained him at work in September 2026. Respondents maintained that the immigration statute required detention, but acknowledged that controlling district decisions supported relief and that the record did not establish regulatory termination of parole. The court followed those decisions and restored the conditions that existed immediately before re-detention. It closed the case after ordering release and the follow-up report.