Turkish National Rumeysa Ozturk is taking place in Louisiana as her removal procedures unfold.
A federal judge signaled on April 14 that Vermont could order Tufts University student Le Mesaozturk to return as he was considering a petition for release from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Ozturk, 30, is a Turkish national and Tufts doctoral student detained by federal immigration authorities in Summerville, Massachusetts on March 25th after his student visa was revoked. She was then moved to New Hampshire, then Vermont, and finally to Louisiana.
“Of course, she’s abandoning the possibility that she’ll come back here to deal with the constitutional claims of habeas protection. Of course, they won’t affect the removal process,” District Judge William K. Session said after hearing discussions about the case’s firing.
The session said Ozturk’s presence in Vermont court would be necessary “as he is addressing issues relating to release,” and that she could help her lawyers. He asked how that series of actions could harm the federal government.
Acting attorney for Michael Drescher said he was not ready to answer the question. However, he noted that there could be issues with where Ozturk is and who is held where.
The judge later indicated that if he assumes jurisdiction in the case he will likely schedule a next hearing in May.
Ozturk considers it to be the constitutional standard target for deportation of Palestinian pro-eD retaliation, co-authored in Tufts’ student newspaper.
The Justice Department argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
Ozturk’s lawyers blame federal authorities for these inconsistencies and noted that Ice refused to share her location until she reached her final destination.
Drescher admitted the fact in court, but he argued that it was for “just security reasons” and that it should not change how the court controls jurisdiction.
He said in another immigration case, Padilla v. Kentucky, “The Supreme Court stated that habeas judicial powers were not attached under these circumstances and that the fact that the lawyers were unaware of it has no effect on the analysis.”
Oztzurku’s lawyers further argued that as her removal proceedings progressed, there was no need for her to remain in custody.
“If the court is released here, her removal procedures will continue and there will be no impact,” lawyer Noor Zafar argued on Ozturk’s behalf. “So the detention claim is really secured and independent of the elimination process that is happening.”
The judge rebutted by ordering Ozturk’s release by asking that the Immigration Nationality Act is not inconsistent with the discretionary granting the federal government on immigration issues.
“We have no discretion to violate the Constitution, so we are not talking about discretionary decisions here either,” Zafar said.
The judge concluded the hearing by noting his gratitude for the professionalism shown on both sides.
“This is very polite and I take the matter under advice,” Sessions said.
Bilpan contributed to this report.
