Kouyaba Bachirou v. Jeremy Casey, et al.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed an Amended Habeas Petition filed by an immigration detainee who had been held for eighteen months without a bond hearing. The court granted the petition and ordered a bond hearing within 14 days, placing the burden on the government to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner is a danger or a flight risk.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Grant the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus“Hence, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition. (ECF No. 9.)” | agree with court The decision follows from the Ninth Circuit precedent cited in the order (Rodriguez v. Marin) and the government's concession that the petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing after eighteen months of detention. The court correctly identifies that prolonged detention without a bond hearing raises due process concerns. |
Order a bond hearing within 14 days“The Court ORDERS a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge for Kouyaba Bachirou (A# 249-140-662) within 14 days of the date of this Order.” | agree with court The order specifies the timeline and the burden of proof (clear and convincing evidence) consistent with the government's concession and Ninth Circuit law regarding immigration detention due process. |
The order itself: sound — The order is concise but legally sound. It correctly applies the standard for habeas corpus in immigration detention cases, relies on binding Ninth Circuit precedent (Rodriguez v. Marin) to support the due process violation, and incorporates the government's concession regarding the burden of proof. The remedy (bond hearing with specific timeline and burden) is appropriate and consistent with the law.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 KOUYABA BACHIROU, Case No. 26-cv-03322-BAS-MMP 14 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING AMENDED 15 v. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 9) 16 JEREMY CASEY, et al., 17 Respondents. 18 19 20 21 Petitioner Kouyaba Bachirou filed an Amended Habeas Petition pursuant to 28 22 U.S.C. § 2241, claiming his immigration detention has been arbitrarily and unreasonably 23 prolonged and that he was improperly denied a bond hearing. (ECF No. 9.) The 24 Government concedes that, given the Court’s prior rulings, Petitioner is entitled to a bond 25 hearing where the Government would bear the burden of establishing by clear and 26 convincing evidence that Petitioner is either a danger to the community or a risk of flight. 27 (ECF No. 11.) Petitioner filed a Traverse. (ECF No. 12.) For the reasons stated below, the 28 Court GRANTS the Petition and orders a bond hearing. 1 I. LEGAL STANDARD 2 A writ of habeas corpus is “available to every individual detained within the United 3 States.” Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 525 (2004). “The traditional function of the 4 writ is to secure release from illegal custody.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 5 (1973). A court may grant a writ of habeas corpus to a petitioner who demonstrates he or 6 she is in custody in violation of the Constitution or federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). It 7 applies to non-citizens detained within the United States. Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 8 687 (2001). Since Petitioner is in custody and since he is seeking release from custody, he 9 has standing to pursue this Petition. 10 II. BACKGROUND 11 Petitioner, a citizen of Benin, entered the United States seeking asylum on January 12 5, 2025. (ECF No. 9.) He has faced multiple delays in his asylum case because of 13 difficulties locating an appropriate interpreter. (Id.) He has now been in custody for 14 eighteen months. (See id.) 15 III. ANALYSIS 16 The Court agrees that immigration detention without a bond hearing can be deemed 17 arbitrarily and unreasonably prolonged and thus a violation of the detainee’s due process 18 rights. See, e.g., Rodriguez v. Marin, 909 F.3d 252, 256 (9th Cir. 2018) (“We have grave 19 doubts that any statute that allows for arbitrary prolonged detention without any process is 20 constitutional or that those who founded our democracy precisely to protect against the 21 government’s arbitrary deprivation of liberty would have thought so.”). The Government 22 agrees that, given the length of time Petitioner has been in custody, he is entitled to a bond 23 hearing. (ECF No. 11.) Hence, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition. (ECF No. 9.) 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // 1 |}IV. CONCLUSION 2 Accordingly, the Court issues the following writ: 3 The Court ORDERS a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge for 4 Kouyaba Bachirou (A# 249-140-662) within 14 days of the date of this Order. At that bond hearing, the Government shall have the burden of proving by 5 clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner poses a danger to the community 6 or a risk of flight if released on bond. If no bond hearing is held within 14 days, Petitioner is ordered released forthwith. 7 8 The Clerk of the Court shall close the case. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 11 ||} DATED: July 1, 2026 ii ly A (Dipharb 12 Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge 3 United States District Court 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28