govinfo:USCOURTS-casd-3_26-cv-00277-1

1 
26-cv-277-BJC-MMP 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
KARLA FABIOLA VAZQUEZ 
ALVAREZ, 
Petitioner, 
v. 
TODD LYONS, et al, 
 Respondents. 

ORDER GRANTING AMENDED 
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS 
CORPUS 
 
Pending before the Court is Petitioner Karla Fabiola Vazquez’s A mended Petition 
for Writ of Habeas Corpus.1 ECF No. 10. Petitioner is a Mexican citizen who entered the 
United States in early 2025. She surrendered herself to authorities and was detained. She 
has remained in custody since that time. On December 9, 2025, an immigration judge 
entered a final order of removal but granted her relief under the Convention Against Torture 
 
1 On January 16, 2026, Sayda Ayala filed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus as a “next 
friend” of Petitioner. ECF No. 1. On February 25, 2026, the Court dismissed the Petition 
without prejudice for Ayala’s failure to sufficiently allege she had “next friend” status. 
ECF No. 9. On March 4, 2026, Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed an Amended Petition 
for Writ of Habeas Corpus. ECF No. 10. On March 9, 2026, the Court appointed the San 
Diego Office of Federal Defenders to represent Petitioner and set a briefing schedule. ECF 
No. 11. On March 13, 2026, Petitioner filed Supplemental Briefing. ECF No. 13. 
 
Case 3:26-cv-00277-BJC-MMP Document 21 Filed 06/17/26 PageID.<pageID> 
Page 1 of 3
 
2 
26-cv-277-BJC-MMP 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
(“CAT”). 
Petitioner argues that her indefinite detention violates Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 
678 (2001) and 8 U.S.C. § 1231. ECF No. 13 at 6. Petitioner requests that the Court grant 
the Petition, order Respondents to immediate release Petitioner from custody, and enjoin 
Respondents from re-detaining Petitioner under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) unless and until they 
obtain a travel document for her removal. Id. at 16-17. 
Courts may grant habeas corpus relief to those “in custody in violation of the 
Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241; see also Hamdi v. 
Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 525 (2004) (“[T]he writ of habeas corpus remains available to 
every individual detained within the United States.”) Courts are authorized to grant writs 
pursuant to § 2241 to noncitizens in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or 
treaties of the United States. Magana-Pizano v. I.N.S., 200 F.3d 603, 609 (9th Cir. 1999). 
Under Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 682, the Supreme Court held that indefinite detention 
of aliens subject to final orders of removal “would raise serious constitutional concerns,” 
therefore, the Immigration and Nationality Act “contain[s] an implicit ‘reasonable time’ 
limitation, the application of which is subject to federal-court review.” When a noncitizen 
has been detained longer than six months, and “the alien provides good reason to believe 
that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable f uture, the 
Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing.” Id. at 701. The 
petition for release must be granted if the c ourt determines “there is no significant 
likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” Id. 
Here, Petitioner’s order of removal became final on December 9, 2025. Wilson Decl. 
at ¶ 5. She has been in custody over six months. According to Petitioner, there is no 
significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future because ICE has not 
been able to identify a plausible placement for her, she has no connection to any othe r 
country that could potentially lead to a third country placement, and 98% of persons 
granted CAT relief and withholding are never removed. ECF No. 17 at 2-3. Res pondent 
counters that it would be premature to conclude that removal in the reasonably foreseeable 
Case 3:26-cv-00277-BJC-MMP Document 21 Filed 06/17/26 PageID.<pageID> 
Page 2 of 3
 
3 
26-cv-277-BJC-MMP 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
future is unlikely before permitting ICE the opportunity to continue with the “diligent 
efforts it made to affect Petitioner’s removal before the Court’s enjoinder of removal.” ECF 
NO. 15 at 5. 
The Court finds that Petitioner ’s detention has become prolonged, and she has 
provided good reason to believe that her removal is not likely in the reasonably foreseeable 
future. Respondents have failed to rebut that showing. On January 29, 2026, ICE 
Deportation Officer Lashaniece Wilson executed a declaration, attached to Respondent’s 
Return, which states that “ERO is looking to remove Petitioner to a third country and is 
currently working on identifying a third country for removal.” ECF No. 15- 1 ¶ 17. 
However, Respondents now claim that “ICE ceased efforts to arrange Petitioner’s removal” 
on January 23, 2026, six days before Officer Wilson executed her declaration. Return ECF 
No. 15 at 1. Further confusing the matter, Respondents also contend that “ERO is still in 
the process of identifying countries that may be willing to accept Petitioner for removal” 
in their Return. Id. at 5. 
Because Respondents have not identified a third country for removal, Respondents 
have failed to rebut Petitioner’s showing. Therefore, t he Court concludes that there is no 
“significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” See Zadvydas, 533 
U.S. at 682. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition for a writ of habeas 
corpus. Respondents shall immediately release Petitioner. Respondents and their officers, 
agents, employees, attorneys, and persons acting on their behalf or in concert with them 
are enjoined from removing Petitioner to a third country without notice and a meaningful 
opportunity to be heard, following the process detailed in D.V.D. v. U.S. Dep’t Homeland 
Sec., 2025 WL 1453640, *1 (D.Mass. May 21, 2025). The Clerk of Court shall close this 
case. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: June 17, 2026 
 
Case 3:26-cv-00277-BJC-MMP Document 21 Filed 06/17/26 PageID.<pageID> 
Page 3 of 3

Passage view · GavelSight