Farouk Tariq v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice Attorney General Pamela Bondi
This text of Farouk Tariq v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice Attorney General Pamela Bondi (Farouk Tariq v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice Attorney General Pamela Bondi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : FAROUK TARIQ, : : 25-CV-6999 Petitioner, : ORDER -v- : : U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. : Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. : Department of Justice Attorney General PAMELA : BONDI, : : Respondents. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X
NINA R. MORRISON, United States District Judge: WHEREAS, Petitioner, through counsel, states that he was detained by Respondents on December 3, 2025, and after being transferred to the Denis R. Hurley courthouse in Queens, New York, was transferred to South Shore University Hospital on December 4, 2025 due to extreme pain in his chest and shortness of breath, where he currently remains hospitalized; WHEREAS, through counsel, Petitioner avers that Respondents attempted to remove Petitioner from the hospital on December 15, 2025 despite his need for urgent medical treatment for a life-threatening medical condition, and on December 19, 2025 informed Petitioner that they planned to deport him to his home country because
there was no detention facility available to treat his medical needs; WHEREAS, through counsel, Petitioner filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (the “Petition”), ECF No. 1 (Dec. 19, 2025), alleging that his detention violates
his constitutional and statutory rights; WHEREAS, Petitioner has sought an emergency order to, inter alia,
temporarily enjoin Respondents from transferring Petitioner outside of the New York City region and enjoin Respondents from transferring Petitioner to any detention
facility while this habeas petition is pending; It is hereby:
ORDERED, that in order to preserve the Court’s jurisdiction pending final disposition of the Petition, Respondents are ENJOINED from moving Petitioner to a location outside this District, the Southern District of New York, or the District of
New Jersey absent further order of this Court. See, e.g., Loc. 1814, Int’l Longshoremen’s Ass’n, AFL-CIO v. New York Shipping Ass’n, Inc., 965 F.2d 1224,
1237 (2d Cir. 1992) (“Once the district court acquires jurisdiction over the subject matter of, and the parties to, the litigation, the All Writs Act [28 U.S.C. § 1651] authorizes a federal court to protect that jurisdiction.”)1; Garcia-Izquierdo v. Gartner,
No. 04 Civ. 7377, 2004 WL 2093515, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 17, 2004) (observing that, under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, a district court “may order that a petitioner’s deportation be stayed . . . when a stay is necessary to preserve the Court’s
jurisdiction of the case”); Khalil v. Joyce, No. 25 Civ. 1935, 2025 WL 750599, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2025) (barring the government from removing petitioner from the
United States until the Court could address his claim); cf. Michael v. I.N.S., 48 F.3d 657, 661–62 (2d Cir. 1995) (holding that the All Writs Act provides a federal court of
appeals reviewing a final removal order with a basis to stay removal); IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 65(b)(1), in
light of the facts and circumstances related to Petitioner's urgent medical needs outlined in the petition and supporting exhibits, Respondents are temporarily enjoined from removing Petitioner from South Shore Hospital or any other hospital
facility, and are further temporarily enjoined from taking him to a detention center until 14 days from this order (6:00pm on January 2, 2026) or unless they seek and
obtain prior leave of this Court to do so.
1 In all quotations from cases, citations, footnotes, brackets, ellipses, and emphases are omitted unless otherwise indicated. The Court will set a schedule for further proceedings on the petition by
separate order. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to immediately email a copy of this Order to the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) for the Eastern District of New
York. Petitioner’s counsel shall also serve a copy of the order on the USAO. SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 19, 2025 /s/ Nina R. Morrison
Brooklyn, New York Nina R. Morrison Miscellaneous Duty Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Farouk Tariq v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice Attorney General Pamela Bondi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farouk-tariq-v-us-department-of-homeland-security-us-immigration-and-nyed-2025.