Published September 22, 2026 at 3:36 PM ET · Updated September 22, 2026 at 7:25 PM ET
Judge temporarily blocks deportation of illegal immigrant shot by ICE agent in Austin
1 independent outlet is covering this story, first reported here by Fox News - Latest. Verification: Watching (how we verify). Every headline links to the original reporting.
A judge has temporarily blocked the deportation of an illegal immigrant who was shot by an ICE agent in Austin. The order pauses the immigrant's removal from the country.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 8 d ago, when Fox News - Latest reported it. So far this remains a single-source report. The most recent report came 8 d ago from Fox News - Latest.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Yamataya v. Fisher held that a noncitizen who has entered the United States, lawfully or not, cannot be removed without due process, at minimum notice and a chance to be heard. Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr held that federal courts keep habeas jurisdiction over legal challenges by aliens facing removal. A judge pausing removal so process can occur is those holdings at work.
Kaoru Yamataya v. Thomas M. Fisher, Immigrant and Chinese Inspector (The Japanese Immigrant Case) 189 U.S. 86 (1903)
Vote: Majority for the Court (Harlan); Brewer and Peckham dissenting. Exact 7-2 tally not… · Opinion: Harlan
Although Congress may commit exclusion and deportation to executive officers without judicial trial, an alien who has landed and become part of the U.S.
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr 533 U.S. 289 (2001)
Vote: 5-4 · Opinion: Justice John Paul Stevens
Two holdings. (1) Jurisdiction: notwithstanding AEDPA and IIRIRA's review-stripping provisions, federal district courts retain jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to decide pure questions of law in habeas petitions filed by aliens facing removal. Because barring all judicial review of such questions would raise a serious Suspension Clause problem — habeas at its historical core ran to executive detention — the Court required a clear, unambiguous statement from Congress before reading a statute to eliminate habeas, and found none.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
