Maryland Criminal & Immigration Lawyer Blog
Today, immigrants face arrest and detention from an especially aggressive Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. In some cases, immigrants may be in detention for months or years (pending the outcome of removal proceedings) with no way to secure their release. Fortunately, the law does have ways to fight back. If you need to challenge a detention by ICE, you need a skilled legal advocate on your side and should get in touch with an experienced Maryland immigration lawyer.
W.H.-L. was one of those people. He was paroled into the United States in the summer of 2022, meaning that he had permission to remain in the U.S. temporarily. During his time in the U.S., the man complied with all the terms of his parole.
The man also submitted several applications to adjust his status, including one for asylum and one for a change of status based on marriage to a U.S. citizen. W.H.-L. had no criminal history or convictions.
As a part of his parole, the man reported to ICE on October 15, 2025. ICE served him with a warrant and a notice to appear. The latter document charged the man with violating the Immigration and Nationality Act, saying that W.H.-L. was “an alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or paroled.”
W.H.-L. got legal counsel and fought back. He filed something called a “petition for writ of habeas corpus.” This is a legal step you can take if you are in federal custody in violation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution.
The immigrant’s petition argued that he should be detained under 8 USC Section 1226(a). Section 1226 is a federal statute covering the “apprehension and detention of aliens.” The statute requires the government to issue a warrant, after which it may arrest and detain the immigrant pending a decision on deportation.
The government contended that it detained the man under a different federal statute, Section 1225(b)(2). This likely sounds like a hypertechnicality, or perhaps a distinction without a difference. What difference did it make which law the government used to keep the man locked up in an ICE holding facility?
In this situation, the difference between Section 1226(a) and 1225(b)(2) was quite enormous. If the government’s legal authority to detain W.H.-L. fell under Section 1226(a), then it had to give him a bond hearing, meaning that the man would have a legitimate chance to be released from custody. If, as the government contended, Section 1225(b)(2) was the correct basis for the man’s detention, then he would remain locked up in an ICE facility until the end of his deportation process or until he appealed to a court of appeals, a series of steps that, as the district court noted, could take months or even years to complete.
If Section 1226(a) was the correct statute, as the judge concluded that it was, then W.H.-L. should have an opportunity to secure his release through a bond hearing, and keeping him locked up with no way out except a months- or years-long removal process would be a “miscarriage of justice.”
On that basis, the district court granted the petition for writ of habeas corpus and ordered that W.H.-L. receive a bond hearing.
If you or a loved one has been detained by ICE for allegedly violating federal immigration laws, you need a powerful legal representative. The Maryland immigration attorneys at Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC can help, offering the necessary experience and knowledge to fight for your rights. Contact us today at 301-519-2801 or via our online form to set up your consultation.