Email from Reza Barkhordari.
Please be informed that a response to the Writ of Habeas Corpus has been submitted to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division claiming that ICE is within their legal rights to detain this family for up to 6 months, because they failed to appear for an appointment. (The family says they have never recieved such a notice). There is no mention of Potential Removal or Notice of Deportation in this letter. The bag-and-baggage letter, which is an official letter of Deportation Notice was missing from the exhibits submitted to the court.
As far as the condition complaints are concerned, I will let you see for yourself:
The Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Any Other Claims Raised by Petitioners.
To the extent Petitioners complain about the conditions of their detention, such claims are improper in the context of a writ of habeas corpus. Unlike direct review where the courts have a broad authority to grant relief, a habeas court’s “singular focus [is] on the legality of the detention.” Zalawadia v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 292, 300 (5th Cir. 2004). “A habeas court must thus confine the scope of its review to considering the legality of the custody issue.” Id. at 299. Any complaints regarding the conditions of the detention are collateral matters falling outside the purview of this court’s jurisdiction. Id. at 299 (habeas is not “a generally available federal remedy for every violation of federal rights”). Accordingly, Petitioners’ complaints regarding the conditions of their detention should be dismissed.