Your client was transferred to Louisiana, and you have never filed in this district. Four things decide whether your petition reaches the merits or stalls on a threshold issue: venue, the respondent, local counsel, and the district’s own procedures for these cases. The Western District has changed those procedures twice this year.
Venue follows the facility
A § 2241 petition challenging present physical confinement is filed in the district where your client is confined at the time of filing. Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426 (2004). It is not filed where your client was arrested, where the removal case started, or where your firm practices.
Nearly every ICE facility in Louisiana is in the Western District: Jena, Winnfield, Ferriday, Pine Prairie, Basile, Oberlin, Monroe, and Jonesboro. The exception is the Louisiana ICE Processing Center at Angola (Camp 57), in West Feliciana Parish, which is in the Middle District of Louisiana. Confirm the facility and parish before you draft the caption. The Where to File tool gives the district and division for each facility.
If your client is moved after you file, the court generally keeps jurisdiction as long as a respondent within its reach can carry out relief. Ex parte Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944); Padilla, 542 U.S. at 441. Tell the court about a transfer promptly.
Naming the respondent
The proper respondent in a challenge to present physical confinement is the immediate custodian: the warden or facility administrator with day-to-day control over your client. Padilla, 542 U.S. at 434–35. Lead with the warden. Many practitioners also name the ICE New Orleans Field Office Director. Naming only agency heads, such as the Attorney General or the DHS Secretary, invites a respondent challenge before the court reaches the merits.
Local counsel
Under W.D. La. Local Rule 83.2.6, an attorney who is not a member of the Western District’s bar appears by written motion of a member of that bar, who serves as local counsel. Local counsel must co-sign filings and is responsible to the court at all stages of the case. Designating the visiting attorney as lead attorney does not relieve local counsel of those responsibilities. The court’s current pro hac vice fee is $105; the habeas filing fee is $5.
Budget for that role. In this district, local counsel reviews and signs what gets filed, and the court looks to local counsel as well as to you.
How the court assigns immigration habeas cases (SO 1.61)
Since May 20, 2026, immigration habeas petitions are no longer assigned only to the judges of the division where they are filed. Under Standing Order 1.61, immigration habeas cases from all five divisions are split equally among seven district judges and six magistrate judges across the district. You still file in the division that covers your client’s facility, but your judge may sit in a different city. Check the assigned judge’s chambers page for practice preferences.
Service and scheduling (SO 1.74)
Standing Order 1.74, effective July 5, 2026, sets one procedure for every § 2241 immigration habeas petition:
- After the petition is filed and screened, the court issues an order setting deadlines for the respondents’ answer or other response and for your reply.
- The Clerk of Court serves the petition and that order, under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. You do not request summonses.
- Federal respondents are served by email at the address designated by the U.S. Attorney. The warden of the facility is served by first-class mail.
- The court expects the scheduling order to make most temporary restraining order motions unnecessary. Reserve a TRO for imminent, irreparable harm such as imminent removal, and meet Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 and Local Rule 65.1.
Build your calendar around the deadlines in the court’s order. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2243, the statutory default for a return is three days, extendable for good cause up to twenty, but in practice the court’s order sets the schedule.
One more practical point: remote public access to filings in immigration cases is restricted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(c). Parties can see the full docket on PACER; the public generally cannot view the documents remotely.
Detention and bond law in the Fifth Circuit is unsettled
In Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, 166 F.4th 494 (5th Cir. 2026), the Fifth Circuit held that applicants for admission are subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), with no statutory right to a bond hearing. On July 2, 2026, a panel held in consolidated appeals (Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega, with Gomez Alvarado and Villegas Angel) that due process requires a bond hearing within 90 days. The full court then granted rehearing en banc, which vacated the panel decision, and stayed the district court judgments pending en banc review. Briefing was scheduled to finish in September 2026. Check the current status before relying on either decision.
Filing checklist
- Confirm your client’s current facility on the ICE Detainee Locator, then confirm the district and division.
- Name the warden as respondent; add agency officials only where your claim needs them.
- Retain W.D. La. local counsel and file the pro hac vice motion with, not after, your first filing.
- Expect service by the Clerk under SO 1.74, and calendar the deadlines in the court’s scheduling order.
- Check the current status of Fifth Circuit detention law for your client’s statutory basis of custody.
Need local counsel in the Western District? Call Seth Bloom at 504-599-9997.
This page provides general information for attorneys and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Court rules, standing orders, and facility procedures change; confirm current requirements with the court and ICE before relying on them. Attorney responsible for this content: Seth J. Bloom, Bloom Legal, 825 Girod St., Suite A, New Orleans, LA 70113.
