Alejandro Rodriguez v. James Hayes

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the petitioner’s claim was not moot when the petitioner could be re-detained at the government’s discretion, without a hearing before a neutral decisionmaker
• holding that a habeas petition can be certified under Rule 23
• holding that § 1252(f)(1) does not 28 limit declaratory relief
• explaining that if petitioner had received a hearing before an Immigration Judge in which the government had the burden of justifying his detention, he would be “in a far different situation from his current one”
• applying the voluntary cessation doctrine in holding that the petitioner’s release to parole , did not moot his habeas petition
• noting that Rule 23(b)(2) “does not require [the court] to examine the viability or bases of class members’ claims or declaratory judgment, but only to look to whether class members seek uniform relief from a practice applicable to all of them”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).