Case: Pualasin Guaman v. Bondi

26-cv-00603 | U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota

Filed Date: Jan. 23, 2026

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This summary joins the following five petitions for habeas corpus filed in the District of Minnesota: Segundo A.P.G. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.; Oscar O.T. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.; Jose L.C.C. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.; Roman N. v. Donald Trump, et al.; and Juan V.A.C. v. Pamela Bondi, et al. Beginning in December 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Customs Border Protection (CBP) launched an immigration enforcement effort that deployed over 3,000 masked and armed federal agents…

This summary joins the following five petitions for habeas corpus filed in the District of Minnesota: Segundo A.P.G. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.; Oscar O.T. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.; Jose L.C.C. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.; Roman N. v. Donald Trump, et al.; and Juan V.A.C. v. Pamela Bondi, et al.

Beginning in December 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Customs Border Protection (CBP) launched an immigration enforcement effort that deployed over 3,000 masked and armed federal agents in Minnesota. It has notably involved the detention of US citizens and the arrest of 3,000 people. As a part of this enforcement effort, on January 9, 2026, DHS, acting through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), commenced a separate enforcement initiative in Minnesota directed at refugees who had not yet adjusted their status to lawful permanent residence. The stated focus of the initiative is to “reexamin[e]” refugees in Minnesota “who have not yet been given lawful permanent resident status” by conducting “new background checks and intensive verification” of their refugee claims.

The petitioners are all noncitizens apprehended by ICE during the surge. All petitioners are being detained without bond under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) of the Immigrations and Nationality Act (INA). In all of these cases, the presiding judge determined that they were entitled to either completed inspection or immediate release under § 1226. 2026 WL 92854; 2026 WL 129059.

On February 2, 2026, all five petitions were joined in front of Judge Jerry Blackwell as ICE failed to file an update on any of the petitioner's releases by the deadline order by the court. Judge Blackwell noted that the government's counsel had failed to comply with court orders in a number of matters in the district. On February 4, 2026, Judge Blackwell held a show cause hearing on all of the five matters before the court. Over 96 court orders were violated by the government just in January. Judge Blackwell highlighted, with regards to the government's attorneys being overwhelmed with cases, that,

"Volume, that is, the volume of cases and matters, is not a justification for diluting constitutional rights and it never can be. It heightens the need for care. Having what you feel are too many detainees, too many cases, too many deadlines, and not enough infrastructure to keep up with it all, is not a defense to continued detention. If anything, it ought to be a warning sign.

But what you cannot do is to detain first and then sort out lawful authority later. Continued detention is not lawful just because compliance with release orders is administratively difficult or because an operation has expanded beyond the Government's capacity to execute it lawfully."

The government attorneys spoke at length about the inefficiencies in the DOJ, ICE, and the DHS and sense that people are "sitting jail" while the attorneys are getting dragged into court to "explain to the Court why the system fail."

This case is ongoing.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Jinan Abufarha (2/12/2026)