A federal judge has ordered the U.S. government to release a Billings father and child from a facility in Havre, describing their detainment as “disturbing.” The ruling addresses critical gaps in how CBP conducts interior arrests and detains minors, and it reinforces statutory requirements that practitioners need to raise in bond proceedings and habeas petitions.
What changed
U.S. Customs and Border Patrol arrested Adrián Espinoza De La Cruz and his child, and they were held at the Havre Border Patrol Station. The judge said nothing in the record shows the parent and child have any criminal history or any earlier encounters with law enforcement or immigration authorities.
In the order, the judge said the legal way to arrest noncitizens under the relevant statute is to issue a warrant in advance or determine they are violating the law being in the country and also are a flight risk. He said “unadmitted noncitizens” in the interior of the country can be detained but not automatically; a bond hearing must be held to assess those factors.
The judge also noted the child’s special medical needs for a gastrointestinal issue and raised concerns about the conditions the parent and child face at the facility. The court noted it had been informed the pair were being held in a family holding room but remained concerned about the alleged lack of proper bedding and basic amenities typically found in long-term detention facilities, which the Havre Border Patrol Station lacks.
Why it matters
This order reinforces that CBP cannot arrest and hold someone in the interior of the country based solely on suspicion they are undocumented. Attorneys for the plaintiffs said they tried to negotiate relief with the U.S. government before filing for their release in court, but officials refused. That pattern—arrest without warrant, detention without bond hearing—is exactly what habeas practitioners need to challenge immediately.
The ruling also matters for minors. Espinoza De La Cruz has lived in Billings for four years and his child has lived there for three years and attends elementary school there. The child has medical issues and upcoming appointments that took months to schedule. Courts will consider whether detention in a non-purpose-built facility interferes with a minor’s educational enrollment, medical treatment, and family stability.
Way forward
-
If your client is detained by CBP in the interior without a warrant: File a habeas petition immediately citing lack of statutory authority. Cite the requirement in the relevant statute that the government must establish (a) warrant or probable cause, and (b) flight risk or danger to the community before detention.
-
For minors in detention: Emphasize the heightened due-process protections owed to children, the lack of suitable conditions at the facility, and pending medical or educational needs.
-
Before negotiating: Try administrative settlement with DHS/CBP counsel, but do not assume they will voluntarily release. Be ready with federal court filings if negotiations stall.
-
Document the detention: Record the facility conditions, when the client was arrested, whether a warrant was shown, and whether a bond hearing was offered. This factual record will support your habeas petition.
Disclaimer
This article summarizes a court ruling and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and rapidly evolving. The analysis here is for educational purposes only. Consult a licensed immigration attorney to assess your specific situation and rights. This summary is based on reporting from the Daily Montanan and may not capture all details of the underlying order. Verify all facts against the primary court filing and the agency’s official statements.