Case Citation
Ceesay v. Kurzdorfer, — F.Supp.3d —-
2025 WL 1284720 (W.D.N.Y. 2025)
Tags
Share
This case challenges the government’s practice of arbitrarily arresting people without notice at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) check-ins after years of reporting without incident under an order of supervision.
Mr. Ceesay is a 63-year-old man who has lived in the Bronx, New York in the same apartment for more than thirty years. He has coronary artery disease and has suffered two heart attacks. In 1997, he received a final order of removal. In 2010, ICE placed him on an order of supervision after acknowledging it had been unable to obtain a travel document for him to the Gambia, the country to which he had been ordered removed. A “Release Notification” attached to his order of supervision specified that once a travel document was obtained he would “be given the opportunity to prepare for an orderly departure.”
For the next 14 years, he reported to ICE check-ins without incident. But at a February 2025 check-in, he was suddenly arrested and sent to the Buffalo Federal Processing Center in Batavia, New York. Because the arrest was without notice, Mr. Ceesay was not carrying his medication. He later suffered a stroke while detained in Batavia. At the time of his arrest at the check-in, the government had not obtained a travel document for him.
Mr. Ceesay is one of the estimated million-plus people with final orders of removal who have long lived in the United States as our neighbors, co-workers, friends, and family. Their sudden detention and removal needlessly disrupts communities, harms businesses, and tears apart families.
Why is this a key case?
The U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment guarantees due process to all people at risk of a deprivation of liberty, regardless of immigration status. When the government detains someone, due process requires notice of the reasons for detention and an opportunity to dispute them.
For people previously promised an “opportunity to prepare for an orderly departure” when given an order of supervision, sudden detention without notice violates the process the government has assured would be given.
What is the status of this case?
A district court found that Mr. Ceesay’s sudden detention at an ICE check-in violated his due process rights and ordered him released so he could prepare for an orderly departure. In its decision ordering Mr. Ceesay’s release, the district court asked:
“[H]ow can we pride ourselves on being a nation of laws if we are not willing to extend that most fundamental right to all—if we are not at least willing to ask, before we lock you up, do you have anything to say? The answer is simple: due process. Everyone—citizen and noncitizen, the innocent and the guilty—is entitled to that sacred right.”