A federal judge in Colorado is considering sanctions against the government after immigration agents rearrested a man four days after an immigration judge found him suitable for release on bond.

On July 28, U.S. Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter ordered the release of Feliciano Paulino Soares after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested him in Utah and transported him to the privately run detention center in Aurora. At the time, Soares was driving home to the East Coast because an immigration judge granted his release.

The U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and ICE must show why “they should not be sanctioned for unlawfully detaining on April 25, 2026 an individual who had been released on bond — and thus someone who was not a flight risk or a danger to the community — on April 21, 2026,” wrote Neureiter. “Respondents shall also explain what steps or safeguards are being put in place to ensure that persons released on bond by an immigration judge are not re-detained over and over again.”

Federal judges throughout the country have weighed penalties in recent months after ICE failed to comply with a court order to produce documents, ignored judges’ deadlines, and withheld key information. In Colorado, judges’ actions have typically been limited to ordering the immediate release of “habeas corpus” petitioners as a consequence of immigration judges violating the terms of their orders.

Soares, a Brazilian citizen, came to the United States in 2021. After four months in detention, the government released him under the “alternatives to detention” program, which ICE recognizes as less costly than detention and effective at increasing appearances in court.

In August 2025, while living in Connecticut, Soares was a passenger in a car when ICE arrested him. The government transferred him to California and he filed a habeas petition in February seeking release. A federal judge sided with Soares in April and an immigration judge ordered his release on bond.

Four days after his release, Utah police stopped Soares for speeding on his way home. ICE then took him from the jail and transported him to Aurora, where he remained until he filed another habeas petition in Colorado.

Attorney Sara Vuong wrote that Soares had a “strong liberty interest in his freedom,” given that an immigration judge had just found him suitable for release.

“There is no indication that Mr. Soares received any evaluation of a material change in circumstances,” she wrote. “While the government has an interest in ensuring Mr. Soares’s appearance at his removal proceeding and protecting the community, the government cannot plausibly justify its position when a district court recently held that he is not subject to mandatory detention, and an immigration judge had determined that he was neither a flight risk or a danger to the community and granted him bond just four days before.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for Colorado, as is its general practice, declined to submit an argument in opposition to Soares’ petition. Assistant U.S. Attorney Kaitlyn Schaeffer asked that if Neureiter granted relief to Soares, he give the government seven days to hold another bond hearing.

“No further bond hearing is necessary, and Petitioner is entitled to immediate release,” wrote Neureiter, citing the immigration judge’s conclusion about Soares’ suitability for release.

After Neureiter ordered the government to explain why he should not impose sanctions for its treatment of Soares, ICE lawyer and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Anh Weinberg asked for additional time to explain what happened.

“This case appears to present issues for which fulsome briefing is appropriate, and Respondents require additional time to draft their response and assemble supporting evidence, including, but is not limited to, obtaining multiple declarations from the appropriate deportation officers,” wrote Weinberg. “This will then allow Respondents’ counsel to present the Court with legal and factual bases for Petitioner’s re-detention, ensuring that the Court has all the relevant information it requested.”

Neureiter extended the government’s deadline to Aug. 27.

The case is Soares v. Baltazar et al.