Erlan Rafael Arias Abreu v. Mary De Anda-Ybarra, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

ERLAN RAFAEL ARIAS ABREU,

Petitioner, v. No. 1:26-cv-01101-KG-GJF

MARY DE ANDA-YBARRA, et al.,

Respondents.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Petition Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). Doc. 14. Rule 15(d) provides that “[o]n motion and reasonable notice, the court may, on just terms, permit a party to serve a supplemental pleading setting out any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the date of the pleading to be supplemented...[and] may order that the opposing party plead to the supplemental pleading within a specified time.” Rule 15(d) gives trial courts “broad discretion to permit a party to serve a supplemental pleading...[and s]uch authorization should be liberally granted unless good reason exists for denying leave.” Walker vv. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 240 F.3d 1268, 1278 (10th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on April 9, 2026. Doc. 1. Since that time, the United States Supreme Court decided Blanche v. Lau, 609 U.S. ___, 146 S.Ct. 1981 (2026), and the Tenth Circuit issued an opinion in Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin, 2026 WL 1876709 (10th Cir.). Additionally, this Court rendered a decision in Hernandez Rodriguez v. Mullin, 2026 WL 1706910 (D.N.M.) (Gonzales, J.). As Petitioner highlights, these decisions collectively bear on the issue presented in the original petition—whether his continued mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b) without an individualized assessment of the need for detention violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. In particular, the opinions raise questions as to whether Petitioner’s status as a Lawful Permanent Resident affords him greater due process protection. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Petitioner has provided sufficient justification for supplementing the original petition under Rule 15(d) and grants the motion.

Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Petition, Doc. 14, is granted. The Government shall file a response to the Supplemental Petition, see Doc. 14-1, within ten (10) business days of this Order, by August 7, 2026. Petitioner may file an optional reply within seven (7) days after the response is filed.

Petitioner’s Motion to Expedite and for Status Conference, Doc. 15, is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Kenneth J. Gonzales___________________ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE • Please note that this document has been electronically filed. To verify its authenticity, please refer to the Digital File Stamp on the NEF (Notice of Electronic Filing) accompanying this document.

Electronically filed documents can be found on the Court’s PACER public access system.