W.D.Wash.: Habeas not remedy for immigration arrest without PC

Even if an immigration arrest lacked probable cause, habeas isn’t the remedy. Reyes v. Hermosilla, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41279 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 15, 2026)*:

The record makes clear that Petitioner is currently in removal proceedings and is detained pursuant to those ongoing proceedings. Petitioner is not entitled to release based on his allegedly unlawful arrest. See, e.g., Marroquin Salazar v. Noem, 2025 WL 2525050, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2025) (concluding that challenges to alleged unlawful arrest by immigration officers were not cognizable in federal habeas action as even if arrest was unlawful, petitioner would not be entitled to release from custody); Rodrigues De Oliveira v. Joyce, 2025 WL 1826118, at *5 (D. Me. July 2, 2025) (“Petitioner’s argument that an illegal arrest automatically results in an illegal detention is misguided. … [E]ven if Petitioner’s initial arrest was unlawful, her detention pending removal may stand.”); Alonso-Portillo v. Bondi, 2025 WL 2483393, at *11 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2025) (“Traditional application of the exclusionary rule results in the suppression of evidence, as ‘fruits of the poisonous tree,’ obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. But the rule does not, as Alonso-Portillo asserts here, dictate his immediate release from detention.”); Marvan v. Slaughter, 2025 WL 1940043, at *3-4 (D. Mont. July 15, 2025) (petitioner could not obtain habeas relief on Fourth Amendment violation where administrative removal proceedings had commenced).

Accordingly, Petitioner’s claims alleging constitutional violations arising out of his stop, arrest, and detention by ICE officers on November 8, 2025, should be dismissed as the claims are not cognizable in this federal habeas action.

This entry was posted in Immigration arrests. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.