MARIO ALDANA SOSA v. KRISTI NOEM, et al.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cathy Ann Bencivengo (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by an ICE detainee who claimed he was being held without a bond hearing in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and the Fifth Amendment. The court ordered the respondents to provide the petitioner with an individualized bond hearing within 14 days, based on the respondents' acknowledgment that the petitioner is entitled to such a hearing under the final judgment in the related class action, Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Order requiring respondents to provide petitioner an individualized bond hearing within 14 days and to report the status of the hearing to the court.“The Court thus ORDERS Respondents to provide Petitioner an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and its associated regulations within 14 days of the date of this order. Respondents are further ORDERED to notify this Court on the status of Petitioner’s bond hearing by January 14, 2026.” | agree with court The decision follows from the respondents' explicit acknowledgment in their supplemental brief that the petitioner is a member of the Bond Eligible Class in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz and is therefore entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). Because the government conceded the petitioner's entitlement to the relief requested, the court's order to grant that relief is legally sound and consistent with the record. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound and directly responsive to the motion. It relies on the respondents' concession and the final judgment in the related class action to grant the specific relief requested. It does not need to engage in complex legal analysis because the government has acknowledged the petitioner's rights under the cited statute and case law.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARIO ALDANA SOSA, Case No.: 3:25-cv-3396-CAB-JLB 12 Petitioner, ORDER REQUIRING A BOND 13 v. HEARING 14 KRISTI NOEM, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Pending before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 18 U.S.C. § 2241 filed by Mario Aldana Sosa (“Petitioner”). [Doc. No. 1.] Petitioner asserts 19 he is being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) without a bond 20 hearing in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and the Fifth Amendment. [Id. at 11–16.] On 21 December 25, 2025, Respondents filed a supplemental brief stating that: 22 Petitioner appears to be a member of the Bond Eligible Class certified in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, --- F. 23 Supp. 3d ---, 2025 WL 3288403 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2025). The Bautista 24 court has entered final judgement as to the Bond Eligible Class. Bautista, ECF No. 94. Accordingly, Respondents acknowledge that Petitioner is 25 detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and [is] entitled to an order from this Court 26 directing a bond hearing be held pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). 27 [Doc. No. 18 at 2.] 28 1 The Court thus ORDERS Respondents to provide Petitioner an individualized bond 2 ||hearing before an immigration judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and its associated 3 ||regulations within 14 days of the date of this order. Respondents are further ORDERED 4 || to notify this Court on the status of Petitioner’s bond hearing by January 14, 2026. 5 It is SO ORDERED. 6 Dated: December 29, 2025 □ Z 7 Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28