Frico Jean v. Todd Blanche, U.S. Attorney General; et al.
- Proceeding
- original
- Outcome
- other — Consistent 7 || with precedent, courts in this Circuit have regarded such silence as a concession.”’
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Gonzalo P. Curiel (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by a Haitian national with Temporary Protected Status who was detained in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The court granted the petition, ordering the petitioner's immediate release and enjoining respondents from re-detaining him while his status remains valid.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus granted“The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED.” | agree with court The court relied on the statutory prohibition against detaining TPS holders (8 U.S.C. § 1254a(d)(4)) and the respondents' explicit non-opposition, which the court construed as a concession to the illegality of the detention. This follows standard habeas corpus principles where the government fails to justify custody. |
Immediate release ordered“Respondents are ORDERED to release Petitioner immediately.” | agree with court Given the finding that the detention violated federal statute and due process, and the lack of opposition from the government, immediate release is the appropriate remedy. |
Injunction against re-detention“RESPONDENTS are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining Petitioner so long as he maintains temporary protected status.” | agree with court The injunction is narrowly tailored to the statutory protection afforded to TPS holders, preventing future violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(d)(4). |
Request for costs and attorney's fees denied without prejudice“This request is DENIED without prejudice. Petitioner's counsel may submit an appropriate EAJA fee application within 30 days of the issuance of this Order.” | agree with court The court correctly identified that a formal application under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) is required for fee awards, rather than granting them in the operative order. |
The order itself: sound with gaps — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the statutory bar on detaining TPS holders and uses the government's non-opposition to establish the illegality of the detention. The reliance on a recent district court case from the same circuit for the proposition that non-opposition equals concession is appropriate in this context, although citing a more established Ninth Circuit precedent on the effect of non-opposition in habeas cases would have strengthened the opinion. The denial of fees without prejudice is a standard procedural step.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FRICO JEAN, Case No.: 3:26-cv-3493-GPC-MSB 12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING PETITION 13 v. FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 14 TODD BLANCHE, U.S. Attorney [ECF No. 1] General; et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner is a native and citizen of Haiti who was granted Temporary Protected 18 Status in 2023. ECF No. 1, ¶ 4. Despite his protected status, Petitioner was detained at his 19 workplace in June 2025. Id. ¶ 42. The Immigration and Nationality Act provides that “[a]n 20 alien provided temporary protected status under this section shall not be detained by the 21 Attorney General on the basis of the alien’s immigration status in the United States.” 8 22 U.S.C. § 1254a(d)(4). 23 On June 11, 2026, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus seeking 24 immediate release from custody. See generally ECF No. 1. Specifically, the petition alleges 25 violations of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and the Immigration and 26 Nationality Act. Id. ¶¶ 89-102. 27 28 l Respondents have responded to the petition, indicating that they “do not oppose the 2 ||petition nor an order from this Court directing release.” ECF No. 4, at 1. The Court 3 ||construes such a lack of opposition as a concession to the illegality of Petitioner’s 4 || detention. See Mikhailovskii v. Semaia et al., No. 5:26-CV-0960-DSR, 2026 WL 1196232, 5 *2 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2026) (“Respondents affirmatively stated in their Answer that 6 do not oppose the Petition, including Petitioner’s due process claim. . . . Consistent 7 || with precedent, courts in this Circuit have regarded such silence as a concession.”’). Thus, 8 ||the Court finds that Petitioner’s detention violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 9 U.S.C. § 1254a(d)(4) and Petitioner’s due process rights. 10 CONCLUSION 11 The Court ORDERS as follows: 12 e The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED.! 13 e Respondents are ORDERED to release Petitioner immediately. 14 e RESPONDENTS are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining 15 Petitioner so long as he maintains temporary protected status. 16 e The Court VACATES the hearing set for July 10, 2026. 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 || Dated: June 16, 2026 73 sale OL 19 Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 20 United States District Judge 21 22 23 24 || 26 In his prayer for relief, Petitioner requests an award of costs and reasonable attorney’s 27 ||fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. This request is DENIED without 28 prejudice. Petitioner's counsel may submit an appropriate EAJA fee application within 30 days of the issuance of this Order.