by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Dec 19 – A man from Senegal who has been detained since being arrested in November charged with selling counterfeit goods on Canal Street and Broadway was brought on December 19 before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Arun Suramanian. Inner City Press was there, and live tweeted, here:
Judge Subramanian: Does the Government concede that if Mr. Tall exhausted his administrative remedies, he could be released? He is arguing that for persons on parole, the conditions must be considered. AUSA: Some courts have granted release in those circumstances
AUSA: Any defect in the original arrest can be cured Judge Subramanian: The other line of cases say, Just release. And there are more than 100 cases like this. AUSA: I haven't counted. I'll have to take your word for it.
Judge Subramanian: Even though Mr. Tall was detained because of a violation of state law, if it was done improperly, shouldn't he be released? AUSA: I haven't researched that. Judge Subramanian: The agency thought detention was mandatory? AUSA: Yes
Judge Subramanian: After Mr. Tall was arrested on November 22, no one at 26 Federal Plaza considered whether he could be released - why isn't that a violation of the regulations? AUSA: They had a warrant to arrest him. It's hard to operate in a counter-factual
Judge Sumramanian: Given that they were operating under a framework that this court and 100s of others have found to be legally erroneous, shouldn't Mr. Tall be released? Even if you just re-arrest him? AUSA: Or give him the bond hearing at this point
AUSA: I've only worked on a few of these cases, I don't have a bird's eye view - but in one I worked on, the District Judge just sent it back for an Immigration bond hearing - and that was the end of the Federal proceeding
Judge Subramanian: Nothing prevents me from retaining jurisdiction AUSA: We might not think it's appropriate Judge Subramanian: Why was a new warrant issue? AUSA: I was trying to find that out. Judge Subramanian: Would petitition be entitled to fees? AUSA: Some do
Petitioner's pro bono counsel from Cleary Gottlieb: The document does not mention any warrant, only that Mr. Tall was observed peddling counterfeit merchandise in front of 448 Broadway. Judge Subramanian: Why didn't you have Mr. Maldonado here? A: Sorry
Judge Subramanian: Are you saying Mr. Maldonado is lying? Cleary: What's in his declaration is not consistent with the rest of the evidence. Judge: You're saying in essence that they chased him down Canal Street then issued a third warrant afterward
Cleary: Without saying he's is lying, we can better believe the written records at the time. Judge Subramanian: We can call Officer Maldonado and you can cross examine him Cleary: But Mr. Tall would remain detained Judge: Do you want fees? Cleary: It's our right
AUSA: Officer Maldonado is part of ICE's Fugitive Operations Team, that's why he got involved later. Judge Subramanian: It says officers were conducting surveillance - inconsistent with what Mr. Maldonado says. AUSA: An ICE officer saw him & got Maldonado
Judge: Break 11:56 am - Judge Subramanian is back. Judge: The remedy should correspond to the violation. There is disagreement. The AUSA says, sent back for a hearing before the immigration judge. The petition says the remedy is release
Judge Subramanian: It is important to get the law right. I need to take the weekend
Inner City Press will stay on the case(s)
More on X for Subscribers here and Substack here
The case is Tall v. Joyce, et al., 1:25-cv-9781 (Subramanian)
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
