Tostrud noted that Fernando, a Mexican citizen, was released from the Texas detention facility in late January without his belongings. He expressed concerns that federal officials have not provided an explanation for withholding Fernando’s belongings at the time of his release.

On January 19, Fernando filed a habeas corpus petition seeking either his release from custody or a bond hearing. The following day, he submitted a request for a temporary restraining order to prevent his transfer while his petition was under review. In response, Tostrud issued an order prohibiting the federal government from moving the detainee. However, the federal government reported that they had transferred Fernando to a facility in El Paso, Texas, on January 22.

Advertisement

According to the ruling on Monday, Judge Tostrud ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure Fernando’s return to Minnesota by January 24. However, the federal government stated that the earliest they could return him was January 27, citing potential travel delays due to a major winter storm.

In a letter to the court included in the ruling, the federal government acknowledged that Fernando’s release in Texas did not comply with Judge Tostrud’s order. The lawyer for DHS said he was “deeply remorseful” for the situation and apologized for the violation.Tostrud wrote in his order that the government’s letter “includes no legal argument, authority, or other response to Fernando’s request for compensatory sanctions.”

Advertisement
Additionally, the federal judge slapped down the department’s explainer about Fernando’s canceled flight due to a winter snowstorm, writing, “these asserted justifications do not support an inability to comply with the January 20 Order.”

“Respondents acknowledge they violated that Order,” he continued. “Accordingly, I find that Respondents’ conduct constitutes civil contempt, and Respondents (as defined herein) are jointly and severally liable for compensatory civil contempt sanctions for airfare costs Fernando incurred because of the violation.”

The judge dismissed Fernando’s request for an evidentiary hearing, calling the procedure “unnecessary.”