Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Petitioner Delroy Alexander Jackson, a citizen of Jamaica, was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on May 22, 2026, in the interior of the United States as a "visa overstay." Jackson filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, arguing that he should be detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which provides for a bond hearing, rather than § 1225, which governs arriving aliens and mandates detention without bond. The Government responded to the petition, acknowledging that under the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Vazquez v. Bostock, 183 F.4th 1160 (9th Cir. 2026), Jackson is entitled to a bond hearing pursuant to Section 1226. The Government did not oppose the request for a bond hearing.
The Court noted that a writ of habeas corpus is available to every individual detained within the United States and applies to noncitizens in custody seeking release from illegal detention. Because Jackson is in custody and seeking release, he has standing to pursue the petition. The legal standard derives from Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Preiser v. Rodriguez, and Zadvydas v. Davis, establishing the court's authority to grant habeas relief when a petitioner demonstrates custody in violation of the Constitution or federal law.
The Court’s Holding
The Court granted the petition for writ of habeas corpus, ordering a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge for Delroy Alexander Jackson (A# 221-486-880) within 14 days of the October 23, 2026 order. The bond hearing shall be governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), not § 1225(b)(2). If no bond hearing is held within 14 days, Jackson is ordered released forthwith. The Clerk of the Court was directed to close the case.
The Court's analysis relied on the Ninth Circuit's holding in Vazquez v. Bostock that "aliens present without admission who are apprehended in the interior of the United States are subject to the detention regime of § 1226, not § 1225(b)(2)(A)." Because Jackson was arrested in the interior of the United States as a visa overstay, he falls squarely within the Vazquez rule. The Government's concession that Jackson is entitled to a bond hearing under Vazquez, combined with the lack of opposition to the petition, warranted granting the writ.
Key Takeaways
- The Ninth Circuit's Vazquez v. Bostock decision establishes that noncitizens apprehended in the interior of the United States are subject to the detention regime of 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which provides for bond hearings, rather than § 1225(b)(2)(A), which mandates detention without bond for arriving aliens.
- A visa overstay arrested in the interior of the United States is entitled to a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge under § 1226(a).
- The Government conceded the petitioner's entitlement to a bond hearing under Vazquez and did not oppose the habeas petition.
- The district court ordered the bond hearing to occur within 14 days, with automatic release if the hearing is not held within that timeframe.
- The case was closed following the grant of the writ.
Why It Matters
This order applies the Ninth Circuit's 2026 Vazquez v. Bostock decision to grant habeas relief to an interior-arrested visa overstay, reinforcing that such individuals are entitled to bond hearings under § 1226 rather than mandatory detention under § 1225. The decision highlights the practical consequence of Vazquez: ICE must provide bond hearings to noncitizens apprehended in the interior, even if they entered without inspection or overstayed visas, so long as they were not apprehended at the border or a port of entry. The 14-day deadline with automatic release as a remedy underscores the court's commitment to enforcing the statutory right to a bond hearing.