Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Michigan

Hamama v. Adducci

Eastern District of MichiganGoldsmithDecided July 11, 2017

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency ICE Read by a model
On June 11, 2017, agents from United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) began arresting Iraqi nationals as part of ICE’s efforts to execute longstanding orders of removal.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
But the Court further holds that the act is unconstitutional as applied to Petitioners in the extraordinary circumstances of this case.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Petitioners filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and/or stay (Dkt. 11)
Disposition Other ruling A ruling none of the other labels describes. Read by a model
In fulfillment of that mission, this Court concludes that it has jurisdiction in this cáse to preserve the fundamental right of habeas corpus and the duty to do so.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
In fulfillment of that mission, this Court concludes that it has jurisdiction in this cáse to preserve the fundamental right of habeas corpus and the duty to do so.
The other claims The delay claim goes on Read by a model
In fulfillment of that mission, this Court concludes that it has jurisdiction in this cáse to preserve the fundamental right of habeas corpus and the duty to do so.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Iraq Read by a model
On June 11, 2017, agents from United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) began arresting Iraqi nationals

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Sixth Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.