Human Impact Project

The petitioner, who was lawfully admitted to the U.S. on a B-2 visa in March 2025, has resided in the country since then and applied for asylum in January 2026, a claim that remains pending. On August 29, 2026, she was detained after the vehicle she was riding in as a passenger, driven by her boyfriend, was stopped; the document states no process was provided to her during the detention. She is now in removal proceedings and has been held at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center. She has a history of breast cancer and takes related medication, and imaging taken since her detention showed a mass or tumor in her breast, yet for more than two weeks she received no follow-up care or prescribed medication. She filed a habeas corpus petition and a TRO application seeking release, arguing her detention violated due process. The government did not respond to the petition despite a court-ordered deadline, and the court granted the petition, ordering her immediate release on reasonable conditions without monetary bond.

A 51-year-old native of Mexico who entered the U.S. lawfully in 1993 and remained for 33 years while raising a family was detained on May 29, 2026, during a routine traffic stop after local law enforcement learned of his immigration status. He had been cooperating with immigration authorities, submitting applications for lawful permanent residency that were approved by USCIS and appearing for required biometrics appointments. The court granted his preliminary injunction petition, finding he possessed a constitutionally protected liberty interest and was entitled to pre-deprivation process before detention, ordering his immediate release.

An Ecuadorian man who entered the U.S. in October 2022 and was released the next day on conditional humanitarian parole had lived in Long Beach, California with his wife, two daughters, and several U.S. citizen family members, including grandchildren. He worked as a cleaner at a laundromat and in production at a seafood company, attended church weekly, cared for his family, and sent money to his ailing mother in Ecuador. He is a derivative of his wife's pending asylum application based on gang violence and retaliation in Ecuador. He was detained by ICE on August 27, 2026 after appearing for a scheduled check-in, despite having complied with all reporting requirements and having no criminal history. He is held at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, where he has not received medical care for back and hip pain following a recent surgery. He filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 arguing his re-detention violated procedural and substantive due process, and because the government failed to respond, the court granted the petition on procedural due process grounds and ordered his release within 24 hours.

A man detained by the Department of Homeland Security and ICE at the McCook Detention Facility in McCook, Nebraska, filed a habeas corpus petition seeking immediate release from custody. The petition does not detail his nationality, family circumstances, employment, or the circumstances of his arrest. The federal court issued an order to show cause, requiring the government to certify the cause and duration of his detention and justify why the writ should not be granted. The court ordered respondents to file a return with supporting affidavits, a legal memorandum, and copies of any arrest warrant by September 2, 2026. The petitioner may file a reply by September 9, 2026. The court also enjoined the respondents from removing him from the United States or from Nebraska, and ordered that if he had already been removed from the state, he must be immediately returned.

The petitioner filed a motion for a temporary restraining order on August 28, 2026, seeking to prevent his transfer out of the Western District of Washington. Federal Respondents confirmed that he is currently detained at the Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma, Washington. Under the court's scheduling order, immigration officials are required to give 48 or 72 hours' notice before transferring him out of the district. Because his location was confirmed and no transfer notice has been issued, both parties jointly asked the court to withdraw the pending TRO motion. The court granted the joint motion and withdrew the TRO. The order notes that the petitioner may again seek emergency injunctive relief if federal officials later provide notice of a transfer.

Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter is weighing whether to sanction ICE after the agency re-detained a habeas petitioner just four days after an immigration judge had found him suitable for release. The government has been given until Friday to explain why it should not face sanctions and has requested more time to compile the relevant information Neureiter requested.

A native and citizen of Cambodia who was admitted to the United States as the child of a refugee in 1982 was detained by ICE on August 26, 2026, when she reported for a scheduled check-in. She had been under a 2004 final order of removal stemming from a 2001 California drug conviction, but was never removed and lived under supervised release for years. She was briefly detained again in August 2025 before being released under a class-action settlement requiring 14 days' notice before re-detention. In September 2025, a California court vacated the underlying conviction, and her motion to reopen her immigration case remains pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals. After Cambodia issued a travel document and the BIA denied a stay of removal, ICE revoked her release and took her back into custody, later scheduling her for transfer and removal by charter flight. She is currently held at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center and filed a habeas petition seeking immediate release or a bar on her removal and transfer. The federal court denied her request for a temporary restraining order, finding it lacked jurisdiction to block her removal and that she had not shown a likelihood of success on her detention claims, while her underlying habeas petition remains pending.

The petitioner, held in ICE custody at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, is mandatorily detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) based on two misdemeanor convictions for criminal threats under California Penal Code § 422, along with a prior DUI conviction and a vandalism conviction. Roughly three months into his detention, he suffered a stroke on August 16, 2026, and was hospitalized for three days before being returned to Adelanto, where he was told he would not receive the physical therapy required by his discharge plan. He has since experienced worsening symptoms including severe headaches, facial drooping, difficulty eating and speaking, numbness, and mobility problems, without being provided a wheelchair or walker despite being classified as a fall risk. He also suffers from HIV, severe dental decay, a history of blood clots, and neurocognitive and mental health conditions, and medical experts submitted declarations warning that continued inadequate care could result in recurrent stroke, infection, or death. His attorney, who also serves as his qualified representative because he was deemed incompetent to represent himself, and his sister both submitted declarations describing his deteriorating condition. He filed a habeas petition and sought a temporary restraining order for release based on a substantive due process claim that his detention amounted to unconstitutional punishment given the inadequate medical care. The court granted the TRO, ordering his release by September 2, 2026, without requiring an ankle monitor, and ordered the government to show cause why the TRO should not be converted into a preliminary injunction.

Daniel Tirado Pantoja, 43, a construction worker who had lived in the U.S. for roughly 30 years and was applying for a green card, was detained by ICE on July 7, 2026, after witnessing the fatal shooting of his employer, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, during a Houston traffic stop. Tirado Pantoja, who has a U.S. citizen son and stepdaughters and is in a common-law marriage with a legal permanent resident, disputed ICE's account of the shooting, saying agents were never in front of the van when they opened fire. Held at the Montgomery Processing Center in Conroe, he lost 20 to 30 pounds and suffered depression linked to the trauma of the shooting and detention conditions, according to advocates supporting his family. U.S. District Judge Alfred Bennett ruled his detention violated due process and ordered his release, and he was reunited with his wife outside the detention center on August 26, 2026.

A foreign national who entered the United States around 2008 was arrested and detained by ICE officers on August 26, 2026, without prior notice while he was on his way to work. He is currently held at the Philadelphia Federal Detention Center, with the government asserting he is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A). He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his detention. The district court granted the petition, relying on recent Third Circuit precedent holding that noncitizens already present in the United States are not 'seeking admission' and therefore cannot be detained under § 1225(b), but only under § 1226. The court ordered the government to release him immediately, temporarily enjoined his re-detention for seven days, and required that any future detention be preceded by a bond hearing before a neutral immigration judge. The court also barred the government from removing or transferring him out of the district pending that bond hearing.

The petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition on August 25, 2026, challenging her detention by immigration officials and seeking to stop her removal from the United States. She had previously been held within the District of Kansas, but by the time her petition was filed she had already been transported outside Kansas en route to a detention facility in Texas for her removal by charter flight. She sought a temporary restraining order to block her removal to an alternative third country, arguing due process required certain procedures first. The court held it lacked jurisdiction because she was not confined within the district at the time of filing, and found no evidence the government concealed her location or moved her to evade habeas jurisdiction. The court also concluded that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) stripped it of jurisdiction to enjoin execution of her removal order. As a result, the court denied the TRO motion and ordered respondents to file a status update on her removal by September 2, 2026.

The petitioner filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order after being told his removal from the United States would occur within hours. He also filed a habeas petition challenging his detention and pending removal. The court found that immigration authorities appeared to have failed to comply with the procedural requirements set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(l), which governs continued detention review. Given the imminent likelihood of removal, the court granted the TRO and imposed a stay of removal pending a ruling on the underlying habeas petition. The court denied the petitioner's separate request for an expedited hearing on the matter. No details regarding the petitioner's nationality, family circumstances, employment, or the location of his detention were provided in this order.

A man detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the legality of his arrest and continued detention. The government argued he was lawfully held under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1), the expedited removal statute, but the court found that provision did not apply because he was not 'arriving in the United States.' The court instead determined his detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which applies to noncitizens present in the country without admission. He was being held at the Donald W. Wyatt Detention Facility. The court granted his habeas petition, ordering his immediate release, and directed the government to provide him a bond hearing before an immigration judge within ten days. The court denied the government's request to impose monitoring equipment on him pending that hearing. The government was also ordered to file a status report on the outcome of the bond hearing.

The petitioner is currently detained at the South Texas ICE Processing Center in Pearsall, Texas. He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging his immigration detention. The court ordered federal respondents to file a response within 7 days addressing the date he entered the United States, whether he was previously apprehended and released by immigration authorities, and the current status of his immigration or removal proceedings. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to file a reply within 7 days after the response is filed. The document does not provide further details regarding his nationality, family circumstances, or the specifics of his apprehension.

Patricia, a 19-year-old Honduran woman living in Austin, was separated from her 8-month-old breastfeeding son after she called 911 to report abuse by her boyfriend but was instead arrested on an assault charge. Prosecutors later dismissed the charge, but ICE took her into custody and held her nearly six weeks at the South Texas Detention Complex, where she suffered painful, swollen breasts and pleaded for a breast pump while her son stayed with a family friend. Patricia said she fled Honduras two years earlier after being raped by a gang member who continued to harass her, and that she had sought asylum in the U.S. Attorneys with the nonprofit American Gateways sued for her release, and U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio ruled that the government had violated the Constitution by detaining her without a hearing, ordering ICE to release her within two days. She was reunited with her son, but still faces a deportation order that her lawyers are appealing.

A Chinese national entered the United States on a B-2 visitor visa in February 2026, authorized to stay until August 6, 2026. His spouse filed an asylum application in late July 2026 naming him as a derivative beneficiary. On August 24, 2026, after his visa had expired, he appeared with his spouse and children at a USCIS-directed biometrics appointment, where ICE officers arrested him. DHS issued a Notice to Appear alleging removability and detained him under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, where he remained held for about three weeks with no bond hearing yet held. He filed a habeas corpus petition and a motion for a temporary restraining order arguing his detention without a prompt neutral hearing violated due process and seeking immediate release. The court denied the habeas petition, finding he had not shown a due process violation because this was his first ICE detention and he had not yet sought or been denied a bond hearing, and denied the TRO motion as moot.

A man who has lived in the United States since January 2008 was apprehended by immigration authorities in Las Vegas, Nevada in August 2026 and is currently held at the Nevada Southern Detention Center in Pahrump, Nevada. He is charged with having entered the United States without inspection or parole and is not in expedited removal proceedings, is not subject to mandatory detention based on criminal charges, and has no final or reinstated removal order against him. He has a prior DUI conviction but no other criminal history noted. He has not yet requested a bond hearing before an Immigration Court. As a member of the certified class in Jacobo-Ramirez v. Mullin, he filed a habeas corpus petition asserting that he is being unlawfully detained because DHS and the Executive Office for Immigration Review have failed to comply with the court's declaratory judgment requiring bond-hearing consideration under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). He asks the court to order his release within one day or, alternatively, to require a bond hearing within seven days.

The petitioner, an immigration detainee held in ICE custody at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, was arrested on August 24, 2026. He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus along with a motion for a temporary restraining order seeking immediate release, arguing his detention violated his Fifth Amendment due process rights and the Administrative Procedure Act. Respondents failed to file an opposition by the court-ordered deadline, and when they eventually responded, they stated they were not presenting an opposition argument and consented to relief being granted. The court granted the habeas petition, finding the detention unlawful, and ordered Respondents to immediately release him in the same position he was in before his arrest, including return of his documents and possessions. The court also enjoined Respondents from re-detaining him unless a hearing before a neutral arbitrator determines re-incarceration would be lawful, and barred placing him on GPS or electronic monitoring upon release. Judgment was entered in his favor and the case was closed.

The petitioner, a citizen of Armenia, entered the United States in 2021 on a visitor visa and has had an application for asylum and withholding of removal pending since October 2023. He was detained by ICE on August 22, 2026. On August 29, 2026, he filed a Motion to Schedule Initial Bond Redetermination Hearing in Immigration Court. He then filed a federal habeas petition and an emergency TRO application seeking immediate release or, alternatively, an order requiring prompt resolution of his bond hearing request. Respondents disputed his claim that he was arrested without a warrant, providing evidence of an arrest warrant, but conceded he appears entitled to a bond hearing under recent Ninth Circuit precedent. The district court denied the TRO application, finding no imminent irreparable harm and noting the case would proceed on an expedited habeas briefing schedule.

The petitioner entered the United States without inspection in June 2021 and was apprehended by immigration authorities upon arrival. He was released on parole about two weeks later. On or about August 21, 2026, he was re-detained by immigration authorities. He is currently held at the Golden State Annex Detention Center. He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus and a motion for a temporary restraining order challenging his renewed detention. Respondents conceded the case was not materially distinguishable from prior rulings by the same court. The court granted the habeas petition, ordering his immediate release on the same conditions as before his re-detention, and enjoined the government from re-detaining him without notice and a pre-deprivation bond hearing before an immigration judge, at which the government must justify detention by clear and convincing evidence.