President Donald Trump speaks as he visits the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool to see the new blue protective coating being applied as part of a renovation project, Thursday, May 7, 2026, in Washington, as Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin listens (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein).
A federal judge in Louisiana has ordered the Trump administration to release a woman who was detained a few months after giving birth.
The five-page order comes amid a long line of district court cases challenging efforts by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to effectuate a mandatory detention regime in the country.
In the case, the petitioner, Karina Alvarez San Juan, won habeas relief by convincing U.S. District Judge David C. Joseph, a Trump appointee, that her detention was a violation of ICE's own rules and a landmark Supreme Court case that requires agencies to follow such rules.
San Juan is a Mexican national who entered the country without authorization or inspection by immigration officers, the court notes.
"She is the mother of four minor children who are United States citizens," Joseph explains. "Petitioner's youngest child was born on January 7, 2026. As of the time of this Order, he is approximately six months old."
San Juan was detained in Florida on May 6 and three days later she was transferred to a detention center in Basile, Louisiana, "where she has since remained in detention," according to the order.
She filed for a writ of habeas corpus on May 14.
Initially, the petitioner's attorneys offered a series of procedural arguments — including the fact that she was transferred out of state from Florida. They argued "ICE's actions reflect deliberate forum manipulation and violate ICE's own transfer and notification policies."
In response, the U.S. Department of Justice argued the court itself has no jurisdiction to litigate the transfer and that San Juan "is subject to mandatory detention under binding Fifth Circuit precedent."
Notably, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has been one of only a few courts to approve of ICE's new — and broadly litigated — detention policy.
Since the government's early June response in the present case, however, the 5th Circuit has amended its own recent precedent on the Trump administration's mandatory detention regime.
Earlier this month, a divided panel found an individual constitutional right to a bond hearing within 90 days — and distinguished that right from the government's statutory authority to detain.
While that recent appellate ruling might have formed the basis for San Juan to restate her original request for a bond hearing, her attorneys previously replied by citing one of ICE's own policies.
"In her Reply, Petitioner argues that her continued detention as a nursing and postpartum mother violates the Accardi doctrine in light of ICE Directive 11032.4," the court order reads.
Joseph explains:
Under ICE Directive 11032.4…ICE should generally refrain from detaining "individuals known to be pregnant, postpartum, or nursing unless release is prohibited by law or exceptional circumstances exist."..the Directive solely addresses a detainee's continued detention during the pendency of removal proceedings.The Directive defines a person as nursing if, "regardless of the passage of time since childbirth," they are an "individual breastfeeding a child." And an individual is considered postpartum for the "one-year period immediately after" giving birth to a child.
For the court, the directive is as clear as the timeline of San Juan's recent pregnancy and childbirth.
"Petitioner falls squarely within the Directive's ambit," the order continues. "Petitioner's child was born less than a year ago, so she is a postpartum individual under the Directive. Furthermore, Petitioner claims that she was actively nursing her child at the time of her apprehension, which, if true, would also fall under the Directive's purview. Thus, unless Respondents can demonstrate why Petitioner's release is prohibited by law or what exceptional circumstances exist, the Directive requires Petitioner's release."
The court goes on to note that the only circumstances, according to ICE's internal rules, that would defeat the pregnancy and postpartum directive are whether a person is a national security threat or otherwise likely to commit an act of violence or physical harm against someone else.
After a hearing, the court asked the government whether the internal ICE directive "has been followed and the deliberative process ICE has undertaken to comply with its own directive."
"Instead, [ICE] filed a Response stating that they had no additional evidence to present to this Court," the order continues. "Accordingly, Respondents have failed to demonstrate their adherence to the Directive…Because Respondents have failed to comply with the Court's invitation to demonstrate that Petitioner's continued detention comports with the Directive, [Supreme Court precedent] necessitates Petitioner's release."
Under the terms of the court's order, San Juan must be released within five business days of July 7. The government must then file a notice of compliance within 24 hours of her release.