A federal judge concluded on Tuesday that the government had wrongly believed it could detain a noncitizen without holding a bond hearing, thereby violating his right to due process.

U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney reached that determination in the case of Javier Andres Garcia Cortes at the same time a proposed class action lawsuit is pending before a different judge broadly challenging the government’s refusal to consider the release of immigration detainees.

In general, Garcia Cortes argued he was allowed to be released under a provision of law applying to noncitizens “arrested and detained pending a decision” on their immigration case. The government countered Garcia Cortes was subject to mandatory detention under a different provision that applies to noncitizens “seeking admission” to the country.

“That’s wrong,” wrote Sweeney in a Sept. 16 order. “Fatal to Respondents’ argument is that, based on their own evidentiary submissions, Petitioner is not ‘seeking admission.’ Turn to Petitioner’s Notice to Appear, which states ‘You have been admitted to the United States, but are removable for the reasons stated below.'”

By definition, she continued, “an ‘admitted’ individual cannot be an individual ‘seeking admission.'”

Last month, the ACLU and other law firms filed an intended class action suit contesting the government’s newly asserted position that mandatory detention applies to noncitizens who already reside in the U.S.

“Virtually all of the (judges) hearing cases in the Immigration Court have followed suit and adopted this flawed interpretation of the statute,” wrote the plaintiffs’ attorneys.

A spokesperson for the ACLU of Colorado said they could not comment on Sweeney’s order or note if she addressed the exact issue in the proposed class action. However, Jess Dawgert, the attorney for Garcia Cortes, said Sweeney did, in fact, rule on the same underlying issue.

Because of the federal rules governing immigration cases, the filings in Garcia Cortes’ proceedings are shielded from public view. Sweeney’s order outlined the contention in his petition that immigration authorities detained Garcia Cortes in violation of the law. The government acknowledged Garcia Cortes was “admitted” to the U.S. in 2018 and was not “seeking admission,” meaning mandatory detention should have been off the table.

“Accordingly, the Court agrees with Petitioner that Respondents were wrong to detain him without an opportunity to seek release on bond,” wrote Sweeney, a Joe Biden appointee. “At bottom, the Court agrees with other courts that have, against substantially similar factual backgrounds, concluded that detention without a bond hearing amounts to a due process violation.”

While there was “no evidence” that the government arrested Garcia Cortes pursuant to a warrant, which is a condition of detention, Sweeney believed that the “problematic” detail did not require Garcia Cortes’ immediate release. Instead, she directed the government to hold a hearing within seven days. It would then be the government’s obligation to show it detained Garcia Cortes lawfully.

The parties to the separate class action lawsuit are still briefing various motions before U.S. District Court Judge Regina M. Rodriguez, who is also a Biden appointee.

The case is Garcia Cortes v. Noem et al.