Judge Orders ICE Detainee Released: Old Records Do Not Prove Flight Risk

At Campos Law Firm, we closely monitor developments in U.S. immigration policy to protect our clients’ rights and future. On October 5, 2026, U.S. District Judge Kymberly K. Evanson of the Western District of Washington ordered the release of Luis Calderon, a Peruvian immigrant held since April 2025 at the Northwest Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Processing Center.

The judge found that the immigration judge who denied him bond had abused his discretion. Below, we explain what was decided, why it matters, and what you can do if a relative is detained.

What Did the Judge Decide in Calderon v. Scott?

According to the ruling, Calderon has lived in the U.S. since 2002 and has a pending application before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) for special rule cancellation of removal for abuse victims under Section 240A(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). He was re-detained in April 2025 after a theft arrest in California; that charge was dismissed in July 2025.

In March 2026, an immigration judge denied him bond as a flight risk, and the BIA affirmed. Judge Evanson found that both abused their discretion and ordered the government to release him within one day, under appropriate conditions, and to confirm the release to the court by October 7.

Why Did the Judge Reject the Flight-Risk Finding?

The rule she applied is clear: any factor an immigration judge uses to find flight risk must rationally bear on the person’s likelihood of appearing for hearings. Here, the immigration judge relied mainly on criminal history but never explained that connection. According to the ruling:

• Arrests without convictions: many were more than ten years old and were dismissed; an arrest alone does not show someone will flee.
• Old convictions: all were more than a decade old, and none involved flight or missing court. The judge did not weigh how old they were, as the BIA’s Matter of Guerra precedent requires.
• Alternatives to detention: he did not consider options such as a GPS monitor, home detention, or the ISAP supervision program.
• Relief labeled “speculative”: he did not explain why, even though Calderon had won an appeal before the Ninth Circuit.

The judge also noted that Calderon has stable work, family ties, letters of community support, and is the sole caregiver for his elderly parents. The government offered no evidence that he had ever missed a hearing.

Does This Ruling Apply to Every Bond Case?

No. It is a district court decision in a single case, not a nationwide rule. Still, it follows a line of similar rulings in the Western District of Washington and in California, and it may serve as persuasive authority elsewhere.

Two more caveats matter. In this case, an earlier order had placed the burden on the government to prove flight risk by clear and convincing evidence, which is not the case in every bond hearing. And an earlier habeas petition by Calderon was denied because his BIA appeal was still pending: the order of the steps matters.

What Can You Do If a Relative Is Detained Without Bond?

• Prepare the bond hearing carefully: gather proof of a fixed address, employment, family, years in the country, and letters of support.
• Explain the record: if there are old arrests or convictions, document how they ended and show the person always appeared when required.
• Propose alternatives: an attorney can request conditions such as electronic monitoring or supervision.
• Review the judge’s decision: if a denial does not explain its reasoning, there may be grounds to appeal to the BIA and then go to federal court.

In a country where every decision can change your future, having the right information is your best tool. You can also revisit our explainer on another federal court that ordered a bond hearing after prolonged detention.

Protect Your Immigration Status with Campos Law Firm

Prolonged detention separates families and puts entire lives on hold. Our immigration attorneys can prepare a bond hearing, review the judge’s decision, and evaluate whether a habeas petition is appropriate. We do not make unrealistic promises. We provide serious legal representation backed by preparation and integrity.

Do not leave your immigration status to chance. Call us today at +1 (844) 922-6767 to schedule a free, confidential consultation in English or Spanish. Campos Law Firm: Legal Solutions in All Areas of Law.

With information from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (October 5, 2026 order in Calderon v. Scott, No. 2:26-cv-02419) and the case docket.