Ignoring habeas corpus
Habeas corpus is the procedural right of a detained person to require the state to justify their detention before a court. Refusing to honor habeas petitions, delaying responses indefinitely, structuring detention regimes to evade habeas jurisdiction, or suspending habeas outside the narrow constitutional grounds — these are direct breaches of one of the oldest procedural protections in Anglo-American law.
2026 Events (5)
DOJ announces forthcoming rule to narrow federal habeas review of state capital convictions under Chapter 154
On April 24, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice announced — in a same-day press release from the Office of Public Affairs paired with the Office of Legal Policy report "Restoring and Strengthening the Federal Death Penalty" — that it planned to publish a proposed rule that would "empower states to streamline federal habeas review of capital cases" under Chapter 154 of Title 28, with DOJ saying the rule "will reduce by years the period between conviction and execution in state capital cases." Federal habeas review of state convictions has been the principal vehicle for federal-court oversight of state capital cases since 1867; an administrative rule that materially narrows that review would curtail a long-standing federal check on state criminal-justice systems without legislative action.
DOJ announced a rule barring federal capital inmates from filing clemency petitions until direct appeals and a first collateral attack are final
On April 24, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice announced — in a same-day press release from the Office of Public Affairs paired with the Office of Legal Policy report "Restoring and Strengthening the Federal Death Penalty" — that it planned to publish a proposed rule prohibiting capital inmates from submitting clemency petitions, and the Office of the Pardon Attorney from considering them, until the inmate's direct appeal and first collateral attack are final. The rule, within DOJ's claimed rulemaking authority, would for the first time foreclose for years at a time a clemency remedy that historically has run in parallel with — not after — judicial review.
ICE defied a New Jersey court's no-transfer order, moving detainee Jagpreet Singh to a Brooklyn facility
On February 18, 2026, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement transferred detainee Jagpreet Singh from Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey to the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, roughly 22 hours after a federal judge had issued a text order barring his transfer outside New Jersey. U.S. District Judge Christine P. O'Hearn called the move "a blatant violation" of her order and ordered Singh's immediate release, later noting the government had separately admitted to more than 50 similar court-order violations in the preceding 60 days.
Judge Blackwell found ICE, DHS and DOJ routinely defied orders releasing Minnesota detainees; DOJ ended the testifying attorney's detail
On February 3, 2026, U.S. District Judge Jerry Blackwell found in open court in St. Paul, Minnesota that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department had routinely failed to comply with orders releasing immigration detainees, leaving people jailed for days or weeks after judges ordered them freed. Questioned about noncompliance in cases she was handling, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Julie Le, who had been assigned 91 immigration cases in under a month, told Blackwell that "this job sucks" and that she lacked "the power or the voice" to fix a broken system. The U.S. Attorney's Office ended Le's detail the following day, and DHS publicly called her conduct "unprofessional and unbecoming."
Federal prosecutors misreported ICE detainee's Maine location to court, nearly stripping habeas jurisdiction
Court filings entered Jan. 26, 2026 revealed that the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Maine, relying on incorrect location information from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told a federal judge that immigration detainee Cristian Yair de la Cruz Guillermo had been moved to Massachusetts -- which would have stripped the Maine court of habeas jurisdiction over his case -- before correcting the claim the same day to say he remained in Fort Fairfield, Maine. U.S. District Judge John Woodcock Jr. then issued a temporary restraining order barring CBP, ICE, DOJ and DHS officials from moving Guillermo out of state, citing a similar location misreport in an unrelated detainee's case.