From Reyes v. U.S. ICE, determined Wednesday by Choose Tena Campbell (D. Utah) (notice that the federal government has not but appeared to inform its facet of the story):
Earlier than the court docket is a Movement for Short-term Restraining Order filed by Plaintiffs Esggar Reyes and Frederico Reyes Vasquez. Mr. Reyes Vasquez was arrested by Defendant United States Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) on December 19, 2025. His son, Mr. Reyes, asserts that regardless of a number of efforts, he has been unable to achieve ICE to acquire any details about his father’s detention. Particularly, Mr. Reyes maintains that his counsel, Alec S. Bracken, tried to name the Salt Lake Metropolis ICE subject workplace on the quantity listed on ICE’s web site—i.e., (801) 736-1200—however that the cellphone routinely disconnected.
Within the meantime, Mr. Bracken filed a petition for habeas corpus on behalf of Mr. Reyes Vasquez. That petition is now pending earlier than the Honorable Jill N. Parrish. Choose Parrish ordered that Mr. Reyes Vasquez shouldn’t be transferred exterior the District of Utah and set a listening to for the petition for Wednesday, December 31, 2025. Regardless of that order, Mr. Bracken asserts that Mr. Reyes Vasquez might have been faraway from america on December 23, 2025.
Late yesterday, Mr. Bracken filed a criticism and a movement for a short lived restraining order within the above-captioned motion. Via counsel, Mr. Reyes and Mr. Reyes Vasquez argue that ICE’s failure to take care of a functioning methodology for communication is a violation of the Fifth Modification’s due course of assure, the First Modification’s proper to petition, and the Administrative Process Act (APA). The Plaintiffs transfer the court docket to enter an order directing the Defendants to reconnect ICE’s public inquiry cellphone line, to schedule a immediate listening to, and to grant every other aid the court docket deems simply and correct….
It’s a foundational precept of American legislation that no individual shall be disadvantaged of liberty with out due strategy of legislation. This safety “applies to all ‘individuals’ inside america, together with aliens, whether or not their presence right here is lawful, illegal, short-term, or everlasting.” Zadvydas v. Davis (2001). The Tenth Circuit has additionally held that the “proper to retain and seek the advice of with an legal professional … implicates … clearly established First Modification rights of affiliation and free speech.” DeLoach v. Bevers (tenth Cir. 1990).
These rights are meaningless whether it is unattainable to find an individual who has been detained. No matter whether or not Mr. Vasquez Reyes was lawfully detained—a query that’s correctly earlier than Choose Parrish and never offered right here—and whatever the final dedication of his immigration standing, the court docket finds that the Plaintiffs have established a considerable probability of success on the deserves that the First and Fifth Amendments require ICE to offer details about the whereabouts of a detained individual.
However conscious of the deference on account of a coequal department of presidency, and having not but heard from the Defendants, the court docket declines to make an extra discovering at the moment about how that info should be offered—as an illustration, whether or not ICE should preserve an lively cellphone line or present up-to-date info on a web site. The court docket notes with concern, nevertheless, that the Plaintiffs’ assertions on this case look like right. The court docket additionally tried to name the Salt Lake Metropolis ICE subject workplace and was routinely disconnected. And the court docket may discover no details about Mr. Vasquez Reyes on ICE’s on-line detainee locator system. Mr. Vasquez Reyes has successfully disappeared.
As a result of the court docket finds that Mr. Reyes Vasquez has alleged an infringement of his First Modification rights, the court docket finds that he has established irreparable hurt. See Elrod v. Burns (1976) (“The lack of First Modification freedoms, for even minimal durations of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable damage.”). Furthermore, if Mr. Reyes Vasquez is or has been deported earlier than any info is offered about his whereabouts, it could be too late for his legal professional to adequately elevate objections or defenses to his elimination.
Lastly, the court docket finds that the stability of harms and the general public curiosity each favor the issuance of a short lived restraining order to the extent that such an order directs ICE to offer details about the whereabouts of an individual it has detained. The court docket finds no means through which ICE is harmed by this disclosure, and the general public has an curiosity in guaranteeing that any one who has been detained by america has entry to an legal professional and that the household of the detained individual is knowledgeable about that individual’s location.
Accordingly, the court docket finds that the Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they’re entitled to aid insofar as they’re demanding details about Mr. Vasquez Reyes’s whereabouts. The court docket will permit the Defendants a chance to enter an look and be heard earlier than making any additional orders relating to the means by way of which this info should usually be offered, comparable to by way of the upkeep of a functioning cellphone line….
The court docket ORDERS the Defendants to offer the Plaintiffs’ counsel with details about Mr. Vasquez Reyes’s detention and whereabouts by Monday, December 29, 2025. The court docket takes beneath advisement the rest of the aid requested by the Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court docket is subsequently directed to go away the Movement for a Short-term Restraining Order pending.
After I referred to as the cellphone quantity mentioned above (which is certainly the one on the ICE website for the Salt Lake Metropolis Area Workplace) I likewise received instantly disconnected.
Alec Stephen Bracken (Contigo Regulation LLC) represents Plaintiffs.
