Cavieres Gomez v. Chestnut, 2:25-cv-00975

Nicolas Esteban Cavieres Gomez, a Chilean national, is detained by DHS following an order of removal issued in February 2025.
An Immigration Judge ordered his removal but granted withholding of removal, finding that his life or freedom would likely be threatened in Chile; DHS did not appeal this.
Gomez filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his continued detention on the basis that removal to a third country is not reasonably foreseeable.
He sought a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction to prohibit his transfer outside Nevada or removal from the continental U.S. during the proceedings.
The court evaluated whether Gomez met the standard for emergency injunctive relief, including likelihood of success and irreparable harm.
DHS argued that additional protections already exist due to an unrelated injunction in Massachusetts (D.V.D. lawsuit), and relief here is premature under relevant case law.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Continued detention after order withholding	Detention is unlawful since removal to Chile barred and removal to third country not foreseeable	Detention is still permissible; six-month presumption under Zadvydas not satisfied; protections exist via D.V.D. injunction	Gomez has not shown detention is unreasonable at this stage
Timing of habeas challenge under Zadvydas	Zadvydas does not categorically bar pre-six-month challenges	Removal period just ended; challenge is premature per circuit precedent	Court accepts premature challenges may be possible, but evidence lacking
Likelihood of irreparable harm	Ongoing detention and risk of removal to dangerous countries establish harm	Harm unlikely given procedural protections from D.V.D. case	No irreparable harm shown specific to Gomez
Need for advance notice of removal/transfer	Risk of removal without adequate notice	Existing court injunction already provides adequate notice	Court orders 72-hours' notice of removal/transfer be given

Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (sets out the standard for preliminary injunctive relief)
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) (presumptively reasonable six-month detention period after removal order; beyond six months, detention only permissible if removal is reasonably foreseeable)
Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, 594 U.S. 523 (2021) (clarifies removal and detention periods under §1231)
Friends of the Wild Swan v. Weber, 767 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2014) (describes alternative injunction test for serious questions going to the merits)
Khotesouvan v. Morones, 386 F.3d 1298 (9th Cir. 2004) (no colorable due process claim during 90-day removal period)