ICE Re-Arrests Immigrants After Court-Ordered Release, At Least 20 Cases Raise Habeas Corpus Questions

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is re-arresting some immigrants shortly after federal judges order their release from detention. A November 2, 2026 investigation by The Guardian identified at least 20 cases nationwide in which people were detained again after winning habeas corpus relief. The central legal question is whether ICE can lawfully return someone to custody after a federal court has found the detention unlawful.

In some cases, immigrants were reportedly handcuffed again before they could leave the federal building. Others were taken back into custody days after release, sometimes after spending months fighting their detention in court.

Federal courts are responding. On October 21, 2026, the Tenth Circuit recognized a government pattern of re-detaining similarly situated immigrants who had won habeas relief. In Minnesota, a federal judge ordered ICE to release Milton Saltos Velasquez again after the agency missed an earlier release deadline. In Louisiana, a federal judge held a senior ICE official in civil contempt over repeated arrests of Ethiopian immigrant Ibrahim Mohammed.

These cases do not prove every later ICE arrest is unlawful. Immigration authorities may have legal grounds for a new custody decision in some circumstances. But they must follow the statutes, regulations, constitutional protections and the exact terms of the court’s order.

Quick Facts: ICE Re-Arrests After Habeas Corpus Releases

Detail	Information
Agency	U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Main legal issue	Re-detention after federal habeas corpus release orders
Reported cases	At least 20 nationwide, per The Guardian (November 2, 2026)
Habeas filings	91,246 since January 2025, per ProPublica data through October 27, 2026
Federal habeas statute	28 U.S.C. § 2241
Key regulation	8 C.F.R. § 241.13
Appellate ruling	Abedi v. Carter, No. 25-3179 (10th Cir., October 21, 2026)
Minnesota case	Saltos Velasquez v. Shea, No. 0:26-cv-04342
Louisiana contempt case	Rodriguez Romero v. Ladwig, No. 3:25-cv-01106
Third-country removal case	DHS v. D.V.D., No. 26-426 (Supreme Court)
Settlement fund or claim form	None
Nationwide order barring all re-arrests	None identified

The count of 20 is The Guardian’s figure from court records, lawyers’ accounts and other reporting. It is not an official ICE or court statistic. The 91,246 figure counts detention challenges in general, not successful releases or re-arrests.

What Is Happening When ICE Re-Arrests Immigrants After a Judge Orders Release?

The pattern involves immigrants who challenge their detention in federal court through habeas corpus. A judge may find ICE lacked lawful authority to keep holding someone, or skipped required procedures, and order release. According to court records and immigration lawyers, ICE has in some cases taken people back into custody almost immediately after trying to carry out those orders.

The Guardian Investigation: At Least 20 Re-Detention Cases

The Guardian’s November 2 investigation identified at least 20 similar cases across the country over the past year. Lawyers say repeated detentions can undercut the practical value of habeas corpus: a person wins release but stays exposed to another arrest on much the same facts.

Bridget Pranzatelli of the National Immigration Project, who represents Akram Mahmoud Omar, described a very sharp increase in rapid re-detentions, often in apparent conflict with federal court orders.

ICE and DHS Position on Re-Arrests

DHS and ICE say they comply with lawful court orders. In one Minnesota case reported by MPR News, an agency spokesperson said a release order does not permanently shield a person from future enforcement, and that ICE may seek to re-arrest in a way consistent with the court’s decision if it does not appeal.

MPR also reported that ICE officials acknowledged elements of the practice, with one saying it dated back to around May. Those accounts come from conversations reported by the outlet, not from court findings.

Habeas Filings Surge Under Increased ICE Detention

Increased immigration arrests and detentions have driven a sharp rise in habeas petitions. ProPublica research cited by The Guardian found more than 91,000 filings, with more since late January 2026 than during the previous three presidential administrations combined. Courts in high-detention areas such as Louisiana and Texas have faced processing delays.

What Is Habeas Corpus and Why Are Immigrants Filing Petitions Against ICE?

Habeas corpus lets a person held in government custody ask a federal court to decide whether the detention is lawful. The authority comes from 28 U.S.C. § 2241. It focuses on the legality of custody, not on directly overturning an immigration judge’s removal order.

Common Grounds in Immigration Habeas Petitions

Petitioners commonly argue that:

• ICE arrested them without the required legal authority.
• Detention has continued longer than immigration law allows.
• There is no reasonably foreseeable prospect of deportation.
• ICE revoked an earlier release without following required procedures.
• Continued detention violates due process.

What Happens When a Judge Grants an Immigration Habeas Petition?

Depending on the case, a judge may order release, order release under an existing order of supervision, bar transfer or removal while the case is pending, require particular procedural safeguards, or order further proceedings on whether detention is lawful.

A release order does not grant permanent status. The person may still have an active removal case or a final removal order. ICE may sometimes have authority to make a new custody decision if circumstances change, but it cannot disregard the terms of a court order.

Official source: 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

Tenth Circuit Ruling in Abedi v. Carter: Court Recognizes a Pattern of ICE Re-Detentions

On October 21, 2026, the Tenth Circuit issued a published opinion in Kaveh Abedi v. Crystal Carter, et al., No. 25-3179. The case came from the District of Kansas (No. 5:25-cv-03141-JWL). The government argued Abedi’s release made his appeal moot. The court disagreed, treating his case as an injury capable of repetition yet evading review.

Who Is Kaveh Abedi?

Abedi was born in Iran and came to the United States with his family in 1991. In 2002 an immigration judge granted him protection from removal to Iran under the Convention Against Torture. He was later released under an order of supervision because the government could not remove him, and he complied with its conditions, including check-ins, for more than two decades.

ICE arrested him at his Kansas home in June 2025 and told him it intended to deport him to Iran despite the earlier protection. The government later issued a notice revoking his release, saying removal to a third country had become possible. A second habeas petition was granted in February 2026 after more than six months of detention, when the district court found removal was not reasonably foreseeable. He was released under supervision on February 25, 2026.

What Did the Tenth Circuit Decide in Abedi v. Carter?

The court made three key rulings:

1. Mootness. Release did not make the appeal moot, because the government had shown a pattern of re-detaining similarly situated immigrants who won habeas relief.
2. 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(i). ICE violated this regulation, which requires a prompt informal interview when it revokes certain releases granted because removal is not reasonably foreseeable. The government did not dispute that Abedi got no interview until at least six months after revocation.
3. Zadvydas standard. The district court used the wrong standard under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). The Tenth Circuit reversed and remanded.

What this means: ICE cannot revoke a release under that regulation without following its required procedures. The decision does not create a rule permanently barring ICE from re-detaining everyone who has won habeas relief.

Official source: Abedi v. Carter, No. 25-3179.

Minnesota ICE Re-Arrests at the Whipple Federal Building

The Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building near Minneapolis has been the site of several reported re-arrests after court-ordered releases. MPR News reported seven cases, some in which people were detained again before reaching the exit. Attorney Daniel Suitor, who represents two of the men, told MPR that handing a released person directly to waiting officers does not comply with the court’s order.

Yader Wilfredo Cortez Andino: Re-Arrested Shortly After Release

ICE arrested Cortez Andino on June 30, 2026, and he filed a habeas petition on July 6 in Cortez Andino v. Mullin, No. 0:26-cv-03191 (D. Minn.). On September 30, the court ruled on the petition. MPR reported the judge found his warrantless arrest unlawful and ordered release.

His wife, Jennifer Cortez, said agents directed him out through a different exit from the one where his lawyer waited, and that he called about 15 minutes later to say he had been arrested again. His attorney filed an emergency motion to enforce the judgment. On October 5, Judge Jerry W. Blackwell ordered the government to comply immediately, report when and where the release occurred, and explain why it should not be held in contempt. The government reported on October 9 that Cortez had been released, and on October 13 the court denied the enforcement motion as moot.

Milton Zenon Saltos Velasquez: Minnesota Judge Orders Release Again

Saltos Velasquez, a 45-year-old Ecuadorian national with a pending asylum application, filed an emergency petition on October 9, 2026 in Saltos Velasquez v. Shea, No. 0:26-cv-04342 (D. Minn.). On October 17, Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan granted it and ordered release by 4 p.m. Central on October 19, with documentation of the release and return of his belongings.

On October 19 he was reportedly handcuffed while being processed for release and placed in a vehicle with other men also reportedly re-arrested. His lawyers told the court. The judge found the government had violated the October 17 order, granted an emergency enforcement motion and ordered release no later than 6 p.m. that day, without special restraints, with advance notice to his attorney. The court warned that further noncompliance could bring civil or criminal contempt and sanctions.

Official docket: Saltos Velasquez v. Shea.

Louisiana ICE Re-Detentions and Federal Contempt Finding

Ibrahim Mohammed: Repeated Arrests After Release Orders

Mohammed, an Ethiopian national, had received protection from removal to Ethiopia under the Convention Against Torture and had been released under an order of supervision. He was one of four petitioners in Francisco Rodriguez Romero, et al. v. Scott Ladwig, et al., No. 3:25-cv-01106-JWD-EWD (M.D. La.).

On February 6, 2026, Judge John W. deGravelles granted the petitions, required release within three hours and said the four could not be re-detained without due process. Mohammed was taken back into custody more than once. In March the judge again ordered his release and temporarily blocked removal to a third country. On July 28, 2026, then-Acting ICE Baltimore Field Office Deputy Director Vernon Liggins directed agents to arrest him again, and his lawyers argued that violated court orders.

Judge deGravelles Holds an ICE Official in Civil Contempt

On August 19, 2026, Judge deGravelles held Liggins in civil contempt for violating the February 6 and April 21 orders. He awarded Mohammed $180 in compensatory damages for the time detained on July 28, plus attorney fees, and warned of more serious sanctions for future violations. A federal judge identified specific orders, found an official violated them and imposed a consequence.

Official docket: Rodriguez Romero v. Ladwig.

Akram Mahmoud Omar: 77-Year-Old Re-Detained After Habeas Release

Omar, a 77-year-old Palestinian man, was held at the ICE facility known as Camp 57 at Louisiana State Penitentiary and reportedly suffered a heart attack in detention. He filed Omar v. Acuna, No. 3:26-cv-00443 (M.D. La.) on April 27, 2026. On May 29, Judge Brian A. Jackson ordered release within eight hours. On June 8 the court ordered immediate release and barred re-detention or removal while an enforcement motion was pending. His lawyers then moved for contempt, and on July 9 the court again directed ICE not to re-detain him while those motions were pending. The Guardian reported he was re-arrested within 10 days of his first release.

Official docket: Omar v. Acuna.

Other reports describe judges in Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Minnesota holding officials in contempt or threatening sanctions over release orders.

Third-Country Deportations and ICE Re-Arrests

A third-country removal means deporting someone to a country other than their own, for example because their home country will not accept them or because they have legal protection against removal there. Withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture protection generally block removal to a specific country. They do not necessarily block removal to every other country.

Lawyers say some re-detentions appear tied to efforts to arrange third-country removals, including after agreements with certain African countries. The worry is that someone wins release because removal to the designated country is not foreseeable, and ICE then says a new destination is available. That does not make a new detention automatically lawful.

D.V.D. v. Department of Homeland Security in the First Circuit

On September 18, 2026, the First Circuit ruled against the administration’s third-country removal guidance in important respects in D.V.D. v. DHS, No. 26-1212. It upheld requirements for effective notice and a meaningful chance to raise fear-of-persecution or fear-of-torture claims before removal to a third country.

Supreme Court Stay in DHS v. D.V.D.

On September 29, 2026, the Supreme Court granted the government’s emergency stay in DHS v. D.V.D., No. 26-426, stayed the February 25, 2026 district court judgment and agreed to review the case. The questions include whether the district court had jurisdiction, whether it could issue classwide declaratory and Administrative Procedure Act relief, and whether the guidance violates immigration law or the Constitution. Oral argument is set for December 9, 2026. The stay is not a ruling on the merits.

Official records: First Circuit opinion and Supreme Court docket.

Can ICE Legally Re-Arrest Someone After a Federal Judge Orders Release?

There is no universal answer. It depends on why ICE re-arrested the person, their immigration status, the kind of release granted, the regulations involved and the exact language of the court order.

When ICE Has a New and Legally Sufficient Basis for Detention

Changed circumstances can support a new custody decision if immigration law authorizes it, but ICE must follow the statutory and regulatory procedures.

When ICE Revokes Supervised Release Without Required Procedures

This was the problem in Abedi. Under 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(i), ICE must give a prompt informal interview when it revokes a covered release, and failing to do so violates the regulation.

When ICE Re-Arrests Someone Against an Express Court Order

This is potentially the most serious situation. A court can expressly bar re-detention or require specific steps first. Ignoring such an order can lead to emergency enforcement motions, contempt proceedings, attorney fees and other sanctions, as the Ibrahim Mohammed case shows.

A habeas release does not give permanent immunity from detention, but ICE cannot treat a release order as optional.

What to Do If ICE Re-Arrests Someone After a Court-Ordered Release

Contact an immigration attorney immediately. The right steps depend on the release order and the reason for the new detention.

Get a Copy of the Federal Release Order

The wording matters: immediate release, release under supervision, or a bar on transfer or re-detention. Keep the signed order and any later enforcement orders.

Find Out Where ICE Is Holding the Person

Use the official ICE Online Detainee Locator System, which searches by A-Number or identifying information. Recent litigation challenges a DHS policy affecting the visibility of some detainees with final removal orders, so a missing result does not prove someone was released or deported. See our coverage: ICE Detainee Locator Lawsuit, Four Legal Aid Groups Sue DHS Over Policy Hiding Detainees With Final Removal Orders.

Preserve Evidence of the Second Arrest

Keep the first release order, any new warrant or arrest paperwork, notices revoking supervision, ICE communications, transfer records, witness statements and anything showing when the person was released and re-arrested.

Ask an Attorney About a Motion to Enforce

If an arrest appears to violate an order, a lawyer may ask the issuing court to enforce it through an emergency motion, an order to show cause or a renewed habeas petition. The Mohammed and Saltos Velasquez cases show this in practice.

Address Any Proposed Third-Country Removal Immediately

If ICE names a country other than the person’s own, the attorney should review any withholding or Convention Against Torture protection and any country-specific claims. The pending D.V.D. case makes this area important to watch.

Keep Following Immigration Court and Supervision Requirements

Release does not necessarily end immigration proceedings. Missing a hearing or violating a valid release condition can create new problems.

Is There a Nationwide ICE Re-Arrest Class Action or Settlement?

No. There is no single nationwide settlement or compensation program for these re-arrests. The reported cases are separate proceedings in different federal courts: individual habeas petitions, emergency enforcement motions, contempt proceedings, appellate rulings and separate litigation over third-country removals.

Some lawsuits involve proposed or certified classes on particular policies, but none covers everyone re-arrested after winning habeas relief. There is no claim form or administrator. Anyone who believes ICE violated a specific order should get advice about their own case.

Related ICE Detention and Habeas Cases

These disputes are part of a wider set of fights over arrest authority, detention and compliance with court orders. Decisions in one do not automatically resolve another person’s case.

• ICE Re-Arrests SoCal Plaintiff Vasquez Perdomo Who Sued Over LA Immigration Raids, Lawyers Allege Retaliation, Court Order Violated
• Fifth Circuit Immigration Detention Ruling No Bond Hearings

Timeline of the ICE Re-Arrest and Habeas Litigation

Date	Event
February 6, 2026	Louisiana judge orders release of Ibrahim Mohammed and three others
February 2026	Kansas district court grants Abedi’s second habeas petition
February 25, 2026	Abedi released under supervision; date of the D.V.D. district court judgment
May 29, 2026	Louisiana court grants Akram Omar’s petition
June 8, 2026	Louisiana judge orders Omar released and bars re-detention while enforcement is pending
July 28, 2026	ICE official directs Mohammed’s re-arrest
August 19, 2026	Judge deGravelles holds ICE official in civil contempt
September 18, 2026	First Circuit issues D.V.D. ruling
September 29, 2026	Supreme Court stays D.V.D. judgment and grants review
September 30, 2026	Minnesota judge rules in Cortez Andino’s case
October 17, 2026	Minnesota judge grants Saltos Velasquez’s petition
October 19, 2026	Minnesota judge orders ICE to release Saltos Velasquez after missed deadline
October 21, 2026	Tenth Circuit publishes Abedi v. Carter
October 27, 2026	ProPublica tracker reaches 91,246 habeas cases since January 2025
November 2, 2026	The Guardian reports at least 20 re-detention cases
December 9, 2026	Scheduled Supreme Court argument in DHS v. D.V.D.

These are separate proceedings, not one consolidated lawsuit or a nationwide order.

Frequently Asked Questions About ICE Re-Arrests After Habeas Release

Can ICE re-arrest someone after a federal judge orders their release?

Sometimes, if there is a new lawful basis and ICE follows required procedures and the court’s order. It cannot ignore a release order or an express bar on re-detention.

What is the Tenth Circuit’s Abedi v. Carter decision?

An October 21, 2026 ruling that ICE violated 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(i) by delaying the required interview after revoking Abedi’s release, and that his case was not moot given a pattern of re-detentions.

Has an ICE official been held in contempt over a re-arrest?

Yes. On August 19, 2026, a Louisiana federal judge held Vernon Liggins in civil contempt in the Ibrahim Mohammed case.

Is there a class action over ICE re-arrests after habeas releases?

No nationwide class action or settlement covering all such re-arrests has been identified.

Does a habeas release stop deportation?

Not automatically. The person may still have a removal case or final order.

Official Sources and Court Records

1. Abedi v. Carter, No. 25-3179 (10th Cir., October 21, 2026)
2. Saltos Velasquez v. Shea, No. 0:26-cv-04342 (D. Minn.)
3. Cortez Andino v. Mullin, No. 0:26-cv-03191 (D. Minn.)
4. Omar v. Acuna, No. 3:26-cv-00443 (M.D. La.)
5. Rodriguez Romero v. Ladwig, No. 3:25-cv-01106 (M.D. La.)
6. D.V.D. v. DHS, No. 26-1212 (1st Cir.)
7. DHS v. D.V.D., No. 26-426 (U.S. Supreme Court)
8. 28 U.S.C. § 2241
9. ProPublica habeas tracker
10. ICE Online Detainee Locator System

Reporting referenced: The Guardian (November 2, 2026) and MPR News.

Update Log

Date	Update
November 2, 2026	Article published

About the Author

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the Tenth Circuit opinion, federal district court orders and dockets, the First Circuit opinion, the Supreme Court docket and 28 U.S.C. § 2241, as of November 2, 2026. Last Updated: November 2, 2026.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws vary by state and individual circumstances differ. The legality of a new ICE arrest depends on the person’s circumstances, immigration law and the terms of any court order. The reported cases do not establish that every re-detention is unlawful, and allegations in individual cases are not findings against ICE or DHS. For advice about your specific situation, consult a qualified immigration attorney. AllAboutLawyer.com is an independent legal information website, not a law firm.