Lawyers for Detained Immigrant Argue He's Entitled to Bond Hearing
Lawyers for a Haitian man who has been held by immigration authorities since September for convictions of turnstile jumping in New York City argued before a federal judge on Friday that their client should be entitled to a bond hearing at the six-month mark of his detention.
May 18, 2018 at 07:37 PM
3 minute read
Lawyers for a Haitian man who has been held by immigration authorities since September for convictions of turnstile jumping in New York City argued before a federal judge on Friday that their client should be entitled to a bond hearing at the six-month mark of his detention.
The proposed class action suit filed on behalf of Augustin Sajous, a 60-year-old permanent resident who has been in the United States since 1972, comes a few months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal immigration statutes do not give U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees the right to a bond hearing, a decision which an immigration judge cited in ruling that Sajous remain locked up.
But lawyers from the New York Civil Liberties Union and Brooklyn Defender Services argue that denying Sajous a bond hearing violates his due process rights, that there should be a sixth-month “bright line” for immigrant detainees to receive bond hearings and that their position is backed by recent case law from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
“The longer that determination goes on, the more concerning it becomes for the court that it looks and feels like criminal detention,” said Andrea Sáenz, a supervising attorney for the immigration practice at Brooklyn Defender Services in oral arguments before U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan of the Southern District of New York.
Appearing for the government in the case, Assistant U.S. Attorney Brandon Waterman argued that Sajous is not an “outlier” in terms of the length of his detention in an ICE facility in New Jersey, though he could not provide a duration that would be considered the norm when asked by Nathan.
Waterman also argued that the length of Sajous' detention is “not determinative” of whether or not his case raises due process issues and, if a bond hearing is held, the burden should be placed on Sajous to prove that he should be freed, not the government.
During arguments by Jordan Wells, a staff attorney for the New York Civil Liberties Union who also appeared for Sajous, Nathan questioned why six months should be the time limit for bond hearings for immigrant detainees.
Wells argued that the Supreme Court has previously found that six months is a benchmark for civil commitment and that, under the Patriot Act, detainees held under suspicion that they pose threats to national security are subject to review every six months.
Sajous' lawyers have also filed a writ of habeas corpus on his behalf and have asked Nathan to order a preliminary injunction. Nathan reserved judgment on the motion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAfter 2024's Regulatory Tsunami, Financial Services Firms Hope Storm Clouds Break
GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Trending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250