United States Department of Homeland Security v. Yaldiz

• Court: District Court, S.D. California
• Decided: September 12, 2019
• Docket: 3:19-cv-01752
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATE DEPARTMENT OF CASE NO. 3:19-cv-1752-GPC-WVG HOMELAND SECURITY, 12 IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE ENFORCEMENT, APPLICATION FOR EMERGENCY 13 Plaintiffs, TEMPORARY RESTRAINING 14 ORDER AND REQUEST FOR vs. EXPEDITED PRELIMINARY 15 HAMZA YALDIZ, INJUNCTION HEARING 16 Defendant. [ECF No. 2.] 17

18 On September 12, 2019, Plaintiff U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 19 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE” or “Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint, ECF 20 No. 1, and an Ex Parte Application for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order, ECF 21 No. 2, to allow Plaintiff to (1) immediately and involuntary hydrate Mr. Hamza Yaldiz 22 (“Defendant”), (2) perform physical evaluations on Defendant, and (3) restrain Defendant 23 in the process, if necessary. Plaintiff requests this “to prevent injury, organ failure, or loss 24 of life due to Defendant’s self-imposed hunger strike.” ECF No. 1 at ¶ 8. This motion is 25 supported by the declarations of Mr. James Dobson, ICE Assistant Field Office Director, 26 27 1 and Dr. Joanne P. Keenan, Staff Physician at the Otay Mesa Detention Center 2 (“OMDC”). ECF Nos. 1-2 (“Dobson Decl.”), 1-3 (“Keenan Decl.”). 3 Defendant Hamza Yaldiz, currently in the custody of ICE at OMDC, has been on a 4 hunger strike since August 28, 2019 and has missed 42 meals since that date. Keenan 5 Decl. ¶ 6; Dobson Decl. ¶ 3. Defendant is drinking water but at a level markedly below 6 what is necessary to maintain normal baseline functions. Keenan Decl. ¶ 6. 7 Dr. Keenan has counseled Defendant as to the risks he faces from the decreased 8 nutritional intake associated with his hunger strike. Keenan Decl. ¶¶ 19-22. Defendant 9 has, nonetheless, declined any meals and promised to remove any intravenous (“IV”) 10 fluid lines or feeding tubes used to provide him with nourishment. Keenan Decl. ¶ 16-22; 11 Dobson Decl. ¶ 6-7. 12 Defendant will face grievous bodily harm, and potentially death, if there is no 13 immediate medical intervention. Keenan Decl. ¶ 21; Dobson Decl. ¶ 6-9. Dr. Keenan - 14 opines that it is medically necessary to place an IV line, administer appropriate fluids 15 through this IV line, and apply soft restraints to prevent Defendant from removing said 16 IV line or causing greater harm to himself and the medical staff that are treating him. 17 Keenan Decl. ¶ 26. Dr. Keenan also opines that it is medically necessary to perform 18 physical evaluations and a variety of laboratory tests to monitor Defendant’s medical 19 condition as he recuperates. Keenan Decl. ¶ 24-25. 20 Plaintiff requests an immediate order allowing it, through competent medical 21 practitioners employed by or contracted with the Public Health Service and ICE Health 22 Service Corps, to (1) involuntarily hydrate Defendant; (2) perform physical evaluations 23 on Defendant, take his vital signs, and perform laboratory testing; and (3) restrain 24 Defendant, if necessary, to accomplish these procedures. ECF No. 2 at 6. 25 When considering a temporary restraining order, the Court must evaluate whether 26 the “(1) the moving party will suffer irreparable injury if the injunctive relief is not 27 1 granted; (2) there is a substantial likelihood that the moving party will succeed on the 2 merits; (3) in balancing the equities the nonmoving party will not be harmed more than 3 the moving party is helped; and (4) granting injunctive relief is in the public interest.” 4 City of Tenakee Springs v. Block, 778 F.2d 1402, 1407 (9th Cir. 1985) (citing Martin v. 5 International Olympic Committee, 740 F.2d 670, 674–75 (9th Cir.1984)). 6 Here, the Court finds that the Tenakee Springs factors weigh in favor of granting 7 Plaintiff’s application. See, e.g., United States Department of Homeland Security v. 8 Ivanov, No. 19-cv-1573-DMS-MDD, Docket No. 6 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2019) (granting 9 order); United States v. Glushchenko, No. CV1904678PHXSPLJFM, 2019 WL 3290334, 10 at *1 (D. Ariz. July 22, 2019) (same); United States v. Onyango, No. 14-cv-0401-JAH- 11 NLS, Docket No. 8 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2014) (same). Defendant’s deteriorating physical 12 state and potential loss of life both create a risk of irreparable harm. Preventing further 13 harm to Defendant, moreover, is in the public interest. In addition, the Court finds that 14 Plaintiff is likely to succeed in showing that its interests in preserving life and 15 discharging its duties to care for those in its custody outweigh any interest Defendant 16 might have in expressing himself through a hunger strike. See Grand Jury Subpoena John 17 Doe v. United States, 150 F.3d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1998) (holding that force-feeding 18 detainee on hunger strike does not violate his constitutional rights as “the preservation of 19 life, prevention of suicide, and enforcement of prison security, order, and discipline, 20 outweigh the constitutional rights asserted by” the detainee); In re Soliman, 134 F. Supp. 21 2d 1238, 1253–58 (N.D. Ala. 2001) (same). 22 In light of the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Ex Parte 23 Application for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. Competent medical practitioners employed by or contracted with the Public Health 26 Service and ICE Health Service Corps may: 27 1 a. Involuntarily hydrate Defendant by placing an IV line and administering 2 appropriate fluids through it; 3 b. Perform physical evaluations on Defendant, including taking his vital signs 4 and performing the laboratory testing indicated as necessary by Dr. Keenan 5 in his declaration, see Keenan Decl. § 24; and 6 c. Restrain Defendant to accomplish these procedures and prevent further 7 injury, organ failure, and/or death. 8 2. This temporary restraining order shall expire on September 16, 2019 at 5:00 PM. 9 3. A preliminary injunction hearing shall be held on September 16, 2019 at 1:30 PM 10 in Courtroom 2D. In the event that Plaintiff shall not seek a preliminary 11 injunction, it shall notify the Court and, absent objections, the preliminary 12 injunction hearing will be vacated, without prejudice to the Plaintiff. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 || Dated: September 12, 2019 '6 Hon. athe Coke 17 United States District Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19-cv-1752-GPC-WVG