Gomez Alvarado v. Vergara — Fifth Circuit vacates panel opinion and grants en banc rehearing

Case
Miguel Angel Gomez Alvarado v. Miguel Vergara, et al. (consolidated with Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega and Villegas Angel v. Mullin)
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge
Elrod (George W. Bush, 2007); Jones (Ronald Reagan, 1985); Smith (Ronald Reagan, 1987); Stewart (Bill Clinton, 1994); Richman (George W. Bush, 2005); Southwick (George W. Bush, 2007); Haynes (George W. Bush, 2008); Graves (Barack Obama, 2011); Higginson (Barack Obama, 2011); Willett (Donald Trump, 2017); Ho (Donald Trump, 2017); Duncan (Donald J. Trump, 2018); Engelhardt (Donald J. Trump, 2018); Oldham (Donald Trump, 2018); Wilson (Donald J. Trump, 2020); Douglas (Joseph R. Biden Jr., 2022); Ramirez (Joe Biden, 2023)
Date Decided
July 10, 2026
Docket No.
26-50183 (consolidated with 26-50219, 26-50221)
Topics
Immigration Law, Administrative Law, Appellate Procedure, ICE Enforcement
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Three consolidated cases challenging immigration enforcement actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security proceeded before a panel of the Fifth Circuit. The cases involved challenges to ICE enforcement and removal operations conducted by officials including Miguel Vergara (San Antonio Field Office Director) and others. A panel issued a decision on July 2, 2026.

The Court’s Holding

A majority of the active circuit judges voted on the court’s own motion to grant rehearing en banc. The panel opinion issued July 2, 2026 is VACATED. The consolidated cases will be reheard before the full court en banc, with oral argument to be scheduled at a later date. The clerk will establish a supplemental briefing schedule governing the filing of additional briefs.

Key Takeaways

  • The panel’s July 2, 2026 decision is vacated and will not stand as precedent.
  • The full Fifth Circuit (en banc) will reconsider the cases, potentially reversing or modifying the panel ruling.
  • Supplemental briefing will be required before oral argument before the en banc court.

Why It Matters

En banc rehearings are uncommon and signal substantial concern among the circuit judges about the panel’s reasoning or result. The rehearing suggests the panel decision raised significant questions warranting full-court review, particularly in the immigration enforcement context involving challenges to DHS and ICE operations.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top