The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from an immigration judge's order releasing a respondent on a $1,500 bond after she had already been granted CAT protection and become subject to an administratively final removal order, holding that immigration judges generally lack jurisdiction to conduct custody redeterminations once a removal order becomes final.
The Board held that post-removal-period detention is governed exclusively by DHS's own regulatory custody-review process and, per the Supreme Court's decisions in Zadvydas v. Davis and Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, does not entitle a detained noncitizen to a bond hearing before an immigration judge, with the sole exception of DHS's own referral of special-circumstances cases. The Board vacated the bond order, noting that the respondent's proper avenues for relief are a custody review request to DHS or a habeas corpus petition in federal district court.
The full text of Matter of W-F-D- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1459006/dl?inline