In a significant due process victory amid the Trump administration’s aggressive mass deportation campaign, a federal judge has blocked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from deporting a 68-year-old Nigerian resident who has lived continuously in the United States for more than four decades.
U.S. District Judge Janis L. Sammartino, sitting in the Southern District of California, granted in part a habeas corpus petition filed by Felix Eni, ordering his immediate release from ICE custody and halting deportation proceedings.
The ruling, issued on December 23, 2025, in the case Eni v. Noem et al., sharply criticized ICE for procedural failures, including inadequate notice and insufficient justification for revoking a long-standing supervision order that had allowed Eni to remain in the community for 17 years.
Eni arrived in the U.S. in 1980 and built a stable life over the ensuing decades. A retired nurse, he has more recently worked as a driver for ride-sharing services Lyft and Uber to support himself.
According to details from the original report by Nigeria’s GazetteNGR, Eni was unexpectedly detained by ICE on October 31, 2025, while transporting a passenger near a military base — an encounter that underscores the intensified, broad-scope enforcement tactics deployed under President Donald Trump’s second term.
The Trump administration has prioritized a historic deportation drive since January 2025, with ICE reporting over 600,000 formal deportations and claiming a total of more than 2.5 million departures (including self-deportations) by late December.
The strategy has shifted toward increased at-large arrests in communities, expanded use of federal resources, and aggressive targeting of long-term undocumented residents — even those without recent criminal records — as part of the president’s pledge to carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in U.S. history.
Judge Sammartino’s decision emphasized core constitutional protections, rejecting ICE’s vague assertions of “changed circumstances” as inadequate grounds for re-detention without proper process.
The court found that ICE violated requirements for notice and opportunity to contest the revocation of supervision, effectively shielding Eni from immediate removal while highlighting broader concerns about due process in the current enforcement climate.
Immigration advocates have hailed the ruling as a potential precedent for similar cases involving long-term residents caught up in the administration’s sweeping crackdown.
Critics of the policy argue that such enforcement actions create fear in communities, disrupt families, and sometimes target individuals who have contributed to American society for decades.
Eni’s case comes at a time when ICE operations have drawn widespread attention — and legal challenges — including recent court orders in Northern California temporarily halting courthouse arrests, as well as ongoing debates over detention conditions and the scale of removals.
For now, Felix Eni remains free in the United States he has called home since the early 1980s, his future still uncertain but protected — at least temporarily — by the court’s insistence on fundamental fairness.
The Department of Homeland Security has not yet publicly commented on this specific ruling, though administration officials continue to defend the broader deportation efforts as necessary for national security and rule of law.
This developing story reflects the ongoing tension between aggressive immigration enforcement and judicial oversight in the second Trump presidency.
Further appeals or policy adjustments could shape similar cases in the months ahead.
