By Clark Kauffman, Iowa Capital Dispatch
Hardin County sheriff sued over detention of man from Uzbekistan
An Uzbekistan native, who is being detained by federal officials for possible deportation, is the latest to sue an Iowa county over the federal policy of detaining immigrants without bond. (Photo by simpson33 via iStock / Getty Images Plus)
Another Iowa county jail is being sued for holding an individual who’s being detained by federal officials for possible deportation.
Javokhir Rahimov-Akobirovich, a native of Uzbekistan who is seeking asylum in the United States, is suing Hardin County Jail Administrator Nick Whitmore and Hardin County Sheriff Dave McDaniel in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
Also named as defendants are Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Todd Lyons, St. Paul ICE Field Office Director Peter Berg, and Acting Director for the Executive Office for Immigration Review Sirce Owen.
In his lawsuit, Rahimov-Akobirovich argues he has lived in the United States for the last five years and first came into contact with ICE when deportation proceedings were initiated in October 2020.
Court records indicate that in December 2020, Rahimov-Akobirovich was released from custody under a $5,000 bond that was approved by an immigration judge in San Diego, California. On Nov. 20, 2025, Rahimov-Akobirovich, who lives in Calexico, California, was traveling through Iowa when he was apprehended by ICE agents and placed in the Hardin County Jail.
The lawsuit alleges Rahimov-Akobirovich is the victim of the Trump administration’s new policy suggesting that every individual held for possible deportation is subject to mandatory detention regardless of how long they’ve lived in the United States.
“ICE and the DOJ have adopted this position even with the weight of almost every federal district court against them,” the lawsuit asserts, adding that without relief from U.S. District Court, Rahimov-Akobirovich faces “the prospect of months, or even years, in immigration custody, separated from his family and community.”
The lawsuit, which alleges due-process violations and unlawful denial of release on bond, seeks a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order preventing federal officials from moving Rahimov-Akobirovich out of Hardin County until a decision can be reached in the matter. It alleges ICE is “ignoring” the fact that Rahimov-Akobirovich was free on bond, as approved by an immigration judge, when agents had him jailed in Hardin County.
The Department of Justice and the other defendants in the case have yet to respond to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit is one of hundreds filed throughout the United States challenging the Trump administration’s new interpretation of longstanding immigration laws. Dozens of cases have been filed in Iowa, with many of them naming as defendants the counties in which DHS and ICE are holding people in jail.
For close to 30 years, the DOJ and the courts held that individuals who were living in the United States and were then subject to deportation proceedings were entitled to a hearing on whether they should be released on bond while their deportation case was pending.
In July of this year, the Trump administration, through DHS, ICE and the Department of Justice, announced new “guidance” regarding the detention of applicants for admission to the United States. The guidance, which has since been declared to be DOJ policy, states that all persons who have entered the United States without inspection are deemed subject to mandatory detention without the possibility of a bond hearing.
On Sept. 5, 2025, the Board of Immigration Appeals issued a decision consistent with the administration’s new policy, holding that immigration judges lack the authority to hear bond requests in such cases.
That shift in policy upends the longstanding interpretation of federal law that said individuals already living in the United States while seeking lawful admission — as opposed to individuals apprehended at the border — were entitled to due process and could argue for pretrial release on bond.
Lawyers for people rounded up and jailed under the administration’s new interpretation of the law argue the new policy was crafted in response to Congress’ appropriation of billions of dollars to expand the immigration system, which will soon enable ICE to double its capacity to jail individuals on any given day.
Since July, immigration judges around the nation have embraced the administration’s new interpretation of the law, stating they lack the jurisdiction to determine bond for any person who has entered the United States without inspection, even if that person has resided in the United States for decades.
That, in turn, has led to hundreds of detainees across the country suing DHS, ICE and their local jailers in U.S. District Court, which is entirely separate from Immigration Court. In the overwhelming majority of those cases, federal judges have ruled in favor of the detainees and said those individuals are entitled to bond hearings.
Despite those rulings, immigration judges continue to deny detainees’ requests for bond hearings, leading to additional lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court.
Stay in the know with stories that matter — visit HolaAmericaNews.com for the latest news, culture, and community updates!
Facebook Comments