In a habeas corpus case last month, a district judge in West Virginia, Joseph Goodwin, granted the release of a poor devil illegally rounded up, denied due process, rendered, and unlawfully imprisoned for a civil immigration violation in a privately owned detention center by Stephen Miller and ICE. The judge wrote this crystal clear condemnation of the lawless behavior of DHS, and freed the illegally detained man. The writing is beautiful and the legal analysis is consistent and completely coherent.
Antiseptic judicial rhetoric cannot do justice to what is happening. Across the interior of the United States, agents of the federal government—masked, anonymous, armed with military weapons, operating from unmarked vehicles, acting without warrants of any kind—are seizing persons for civil immigration violations and imprisoning them without any semblance of due process. The systematic character of this practice and its deliberate elimination of every structural feature that distinguishes constitutional authority from raw force place it beyond the reach of ordinary legal description. It is an assault on the constitutional order. It is what the Fourth Amendment was written to prevent. It is what the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment forbids.
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Petitioner Anderson Jesus Urquilla-Ramos, [ECF Nos. 1, 26], brings just that circumstance before this court as a discrete case and controversy. This court will decide it as such. But I will not pretend, through careful procedural language, that what is at issue here is a technical question of statutory interpretation. The overarching issue is whether the federal government may deploy anonymous agents to seize persons on American streets and highways for civil violations, without warrants, without identification, and without any process before or after. The Constitution does not permit that. The remainder of this opinion explains why.
In our constitutional republic, governmental force derives its authority from the Constitution. But that authority is not unlimited. The Government’s power is legitimate only because it is derived from the People and exercised through law by identifiable public officers answerable to the public and to the courts. The structure of the Constitution guarantees visibility. Both the officer and the force he employs are traceable to authority delegated by the People and subject to the limits imposed by law. When the Government uses force against the public, the citizen can recognize the officer as a lawful representative. The public can evaluate the act. The judiciary can later review it. Every stop, arrest, detention, and use of force can be tested against the Constitution’s protections. Not so here.
For these reasons and the reasons that follow, Petitioner’s Amended Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”), [ECF No. 26], is GRANTED. The court FINDS that both his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures as well as his Fifth Amendment right to due process have been violated. Immediate release is the only relief sufficient to remedy Petitioner’s unlawful detention.
The judge grants relief to the illegally imprisoned man in no uncertain terms:
Therefore, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, [ECF No. 26], is GRANTED. Petitioner is ORDERED released immediately from civil immigration custody. Respondents are PROHIBITED from re-arresting and detaining Petitioner absent significant change in circumstances to justify detention or subject to the determination of a neutral and detached
decisionmaker.
The court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel, any unrepresented party, and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia.
The court further DIRECTS the Clerk to post a copy of this published opinion on the court’s website, http://www.wvsd.uscourts.gov.
Judge Goodwin’s entire decision is here, well-worth a read. Thanks to Hawk for pointing this out on youTube.















