The Third Circuit Court of Appeals this week affirmed previous decisions that the government had to pay attorney fees and expenses of two inmates of the Moshannon Valley Processing Center.

The inmates were Adewumi Abioye, a Nigerian citizen who entered the United States in 2018 on a tourist visa, and Adolph Michelin of Jamaica, who came to the United States in 2022.

Abioye did time in an American prison and upon completion of his 27-month prison term on a charge of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, he was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers who placed him in immigration detention at Moshannon Valley.

His legal status remained on appeal, but, after 16 months in the Clearfield County facility, he sought a bond hearing.

An immigration judge ordered him released on $5,000 bond.

Michelin, whose immigration case was under appeal, was also at Moshannon Valley. He was fighting to remain in the United States “based on his fear of prosecution in his native land.”

He, too, spent more than a year in detention before seeking a bond hearing.

Michelin challenged his continued detention while his case remained under review by the Board of Immigration Detention.

He, too, finally won his right to a bond hearing, and on Aug. 8, 2023, he was released on $10,000 bond.

Both Moshannon Valley inmates, who won their cases for bond against the government, contended that under the Equal Access to Justice Act, they were entitled to payment of attorney fees and costs.

Authorities who were defendants in the cases included the warden of Moshannon Valley, the ICE field office director in Philadelphia, the secretaries of Homeland Security and the Attorney General of the United States.

Magistrate Judge Christopher B. Brown in Pittsburgh in September 2024 ordered that Abioye’s petition for attorney fees be paid by the government defendants in the amount of $18,224.

The petition for attorney fees and costs on behalf of Michelin was approved by U.S. Magistrate Judge

Patricia L. Dodge, also presiding in Pittsburgh, in the amount of $15,841.

The attorneys for Moshannon Valley and the government agencies appealed the decisions to the United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.

A three-member panel of the Third Circuit that included Judges L. Felipe Restrepo, Theodore A. McKee and Thomas L. Ambro upheld the magistrate judges’ decisions.

In a precedential decision, the Third Circuit Appeals Court determined that the awards by the lower courts were proper under the Equal Access to Justice Act, but the panel also focused its attention on the propriety of detaining individuals for a prolonged period of time without a bond hearing — which is a problem confronting many of the inmates of Moshannon Valley even today.

The two inmates who were subject of the Third Circuit case brought their appeals for bond hearings before the magistrate judges by filling Habeas Corpus petitions.

The panel began its discussion of the two cases by citing William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England.

The greatest remedy for “private wrongs” (civil rights violations) is the Writ of Habeas Corpus, the panel explained.

The question before the appeals court in the case of the two immigrants, Abioye and Michelin, was whether a Writ of Habeas Corpus from immigration detention is properly filed under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

In its decision, the Third Circuit panel ruled, “The common law history confirms habeas proceedings are civil actions.”

The government disagreed with that finding, noting that habeas petitions are filed in criminal cases as well, but, the panel’s decision explained, “We are not reviewing habeas petitions for release from criminal detention. We are reviewing them for release from immigration detention. In that context, every element is civil” (the Equal Access to Justice Act addresses payment of attorney fees only for civil cases).

Another point of contention was whether the government was justified in detaining the two immigrants without bond hearings for an indefinite period of time.

The panel noted that past decisions by the Third Circuit have ruled, “Detention becomes more and more suspect after five months.”

The appeals court decision explained the length of time a detention-without-bond can last depends on several factors, including the time already spent in detention, whether it will last indefinitely, the reasons for delaying a bond hearing and whether the conditions of detention resemble criminal punishment — which immigrant detention is not.

“The most important factor is the duration of detention,” according to the Third Circuit opinion.

Abioye and Michelin had been in ICE custody for more than a year (Abioye for 18 months) with no end in sight.

The use of habeas petitions has a long history, the panel stated.

“The Great Writ (of Habeas) was, in this way, no less than the instrument by which due process could be insisted upon,” the appeals court concluded as it upheld the decisions by the magistrate judges to grant bond hearings and to award costs and fees be paid under the Equal Access to Justice Act.