Gil Sanchez v. Decker

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJuly 8, 2020
Docket1:20-cv-04545
StatusUnknown

This text of Gil Sanchez v. Decker (Gil Sanchez v. Decker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gil Sanchez v. Decker, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Opinion

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED JOSEPH EMMANUEL GIL SANCHEZ, DOC #: DATE FILED: 7/8/2020 Petitioner, -against- 20 Civ. 4545 (AT) THOMAS DECKER, in his official capacity as ORDER Director of the New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations & Customs Enforcement; and CHAD WOLF, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Respondents. ANALISA TORRES, District Judge: On June 13, 2020, Petitioner, Joseph Emmanuel Gil Sanchez, moved by order to show cause for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, ECF No. 3, directing his release from immigration detention at the Orange County Correctional Facility (“Orange County Jail”), on the basis of the health risks posed by COVID-19, Pet. Mem., ECF No. 2. On June 23, 2020, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petition, ECF No. 4! The matter being fully submitted, see ECF Nos. 10-14, Petitioner’s motion is DENIED. See Redac Project 6426, Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 402 F.2d 789, 790 (2d Cir. 1968). “A party seeking a preliminary injunction must show (1) iwreparable harm; (2) either a likelihood of success on the merits or both serious questions on the merits and a balance of hardships decidedly favoring the moving party; and (3) that a preliminary injunction is in the public interest.” NM. Am. Soccer League, LLC v. United States Soccer Fed’n, Inc., 883 F.3d 32, 37 (2d Cir. 2018). Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on either his procedural or substantive due process claim. See Pet. Mem. at 5-8. He has not submitted any evidence showing that he faces a heightened risk for contracting or developing serious complications from COVID-19. See ECF No. 13-1 at 2 (submitting medical records that indicate that Petitioner has “no acute disease,” and identifying no medical condition except that Petitioner has developed a “slightly thickened” bladder wall). Nor has he adduced any evidence to demonstrate that Respondents’ actions have created, or failed to adequately remedy, unsafe conditions at Orange County Jail. Accordingly, Petitioner’s request for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction is DENIED. SO ORDERED. Dated: July 8, 2020 New York, New York ANALISA TORRES United States District Judge

! Petitioner failed to file a habeas petition or any other pleading prior to requesting emergency relief.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gil Sanchez v. Decker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gil-sanchez-v-decker-nysd-2020.