BASSAM KHOURY V. NATHALIE ASHER, No. 14-35482 (9th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on May 1, 2019.

Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 4 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BASSAM YUSUF KHOURY; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 14-35482 D.C. No. 2:13-cv-01367-RAJ MEMORANDUM* NATHALIE ASHER, Field Office Director, ICE; et al., Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Richard A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted July 8, 2015 Seattle, Washington Before: KLEINFELD, NGUYEN, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Defendants appeal from the district court’s order certifying a class of alien detainees and declaring that the class was entitled to bond hearings. The class comprised aliens who were subjected to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) even though they were not detained immediately upon their release from * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. criminal custody. In granting class certification and declaratory relief, the district court concluded that § 1226(c) applies only to aliens who are detained immediately upon their release from criminal custody. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. The plain language of § 1226(c) makes clear that mandatory detention applies only to those aliens detained “when [they are] released” from criminal custody. See Preap v. Johnson, slip op. at ____. Because the phrase “when . . . released” conveys a degree of immediacy, “§ 1226(c) applies only to those criminal noncitizens who are detained promptly after their release from criminal custody, not to those detained long after.” Id. at ___. We disagree with the government’s arguments under United States v. Montalvo-Murillo, 495 U.S. 711 (1990), that it should nonetheless be allowed to hold without bond aliens whose detention is untimely under § 1226(c). Montalvo-Murillo is distinguishable. See Preap v. Johnson, slip op. at ___. AFFIRMED. 2