By Bryan Manabat
[email protected]
Variety News Staff
THREE U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees held at the Department of Corrections have prevailed in their habeas corpus challenges after District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona granted all three petitions, rejected the federal government’s arguments, and ordered bond hearings for each detainee.
The petitioners — Yuetong Wang, Changwu Ruan and Rui Li — are represented by attorney Cong Nie, who filed separate habeas petitions naming as respondents Acting ICE San Francisco Field Office Director Sergio Albarran, ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, and Corrections Commissioner Anthony Torres.
In court, the federal government were represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Mikel W. Schwab, while Torres was represented by CNMI Assistant Attorney General Robert J. Glass Jr.
All three detainees are Chinese nationals who were paroled into the CNMI under the CNMI-only parole program and later detained by ICE. Each is in removal proceedings and is seeking withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture.
Wang case: Court rejects ‘exceptional program’ argument
In Wang’s case, the federal government argued that the CNMI-only parole program was “crafted to allow in visitors from surrounding, high-immigration-risk countries, particularly in this instance China, by classifying them as arriving aliens that are not subject to bond hearings.” The federal government said the program “seeks the advantage of tourists, while eliminating incentives for the subterfuge of immigration tourism, by decreasing the motivation to use the CNMI-Only Parole to facilitate easy immigration into the U.S. and its communities.”
Judge Manglona acknowledged the argument but noted it was lacking citation to legal authority. She ruled that the federal government’s policy rationale did not alter the constitutional analysis.
The court held it was “unnecessary to factor in the ‘exceptionality’ of the CNMI-only parole program,” finding no reason why its due process analysis should diverge from other courts addressing prolonged detention claims involving individuals held under mandatory detention.
Wang had been detained for more than eight months in conditions identical to penal confinement. Applying the six-factor Banda test, the court found the first three factors weighed heavily in her favor.
The court ordered ICE to provide a bond hearing within 14 days, at which the government must show by clear and convincing evidence that Wang is a danger to the community or a flight risk. If no hearing is held, she must be released.
Ruan case: Court makes same findings, rejects same arguments
In Ruan’s case, federal respondents advanced the same CNMI-only parole argument, asserting the program was designed to classify Chinese nationals as arriving aliens not entitled to bond hearings and to deter “immigration tourism.”
Judge Manglona again found the argument unsupported by legal authority and held that the federal government’s policy rationale did not affect the constitutional analysis. As in Wang’s case, the court stated it saw no reason for its due process analysis to diverge from other prolonged detention cases nationwide.
Ruan had been detained for more than seven months in the same Corrections unit as criminal defendants. The court found his detention unconstitutionally prolonged and ordered a bond hearing within 14 days or release.
Li case: Court rejects ICE statutory theory
In Li’s case, federal respondents argued that he remained an “arriving alien” and an “alien seeking admission,” subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A). They again relied on the CNMI-only parole program to justify continued detention.
Judge Manglona rejected that interpretation, finding ICE had conflated the terms “applicant for admission” and “alien seeking admission.” The court adopted the reasoning of three federal circuit courts, concluding that mandatory detention applies only to noncitizens who are both applicants for admission and actively seeking admission.
Li was not seeking admission, the court found, having been paroled into the CNMI nearly two years earlier and now seeking only relief from removal.
Because Li is properly detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), he is entitled to a bond hearing. The court did not reach his constitutional claim.
The federal court ordered respondents to file status reports in the Wang and Ruan cases by June 22, and in the Li case by July 3.
Bryan Manabat was a liberal arts student of Northern Marianas College where he also studied criminal justice. He is the recipient of the NMI Humanities Award as an Outstanding Teacher (Non-Classroom) in 2013, and has worked for the CNMI Motheread/Fatheread Literacy Program as lead facilitator.
