No. 23-5673

Javier Martinez v. Lowell Clark, Warden, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-09-29
Status: GVR
Type: IFP
Relisted (3)IFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: 8-usc-1226 discretionary-determination due-process habeas-corpus immigration-detention judicial-review mixed-question-of-law-and-fact statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus CriminalProcedure Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-04-12 (distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether an agency's determination that an immigration detainee is a 'danger to the community' is a discretionary determination barred from judicial review

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Whether an agency’s determination that undisputed or established facts demonstrate an immigration detainee is a “danger to the community” is a discretionary determination barred from judicial review under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(e), or whether such a determination constitutes a mixed question of law and fact subject to judicial review in accordance with Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, 589 U.S. ---, 140 S. Ct. 1062 (2020)? (2) Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1226(e), which bars federal courts from reviewing discretionary judgments or setting aside custody determinations made by the Attorney General under § 1226, is applicable when the district court held § 1226 unconstitutional as applied and ordered a bond hearing pursuant to the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause? i

Docket Entries

2024-05-17
Judgment Issued.
2024-04-15
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Wilkinson</i> v. <i>Garland</i>, 601 U. S. ___ (2024).
2024-04-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2024.
2024-03-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/28/2024.
2024-01-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-03
Reply of petitioner Javier Martinez filed.
2023-12-29
Memorandum of respondents Lowell Clark, Warden, et al. filed.
2023-11-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 29, 2023.
2023-11-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 29, 2023 to December 29, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-10-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 29, 2023.
2023-10-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 30, 2023 to November 29, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-09-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 30, 2023)
2023-08-17
Application (23A143) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until September 27, 2023.
2023-08-15
Application (23A143) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 28, 2023 to September 27, 2023, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Clark, Lowell, et al.
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Javier Martinez
Robert PauwGibbs Houston Pauw, Petitioner
Robert PauwGibbs Houston Pauw, Petitioner
Aaron Luke KorthuisNorthwest Immigrant Rights Project, Petitioner
Aaron Luke KorthuisNorthwest Immigrant Rights Project, Petitioner
Leila Sukjoo KangNorthwest lmmigrant Rights Project, Petitioner
Leila Sukjoo KangNorthwest lmmigrant Rights Project, Petitioner
Matthew Hyrum AdamsNorthwest Immigrant Rights Project, Petitioner
Matthew Hyrum AdamsNorthwest Immigrant Rights Project, Petitioner