Judge Orders ICE to Free Canadian Dentist After Hearing Notice Went to Old Address

A federal judge in Minnesota has ordered immigration authorities to immediately release William Virgil Lizardo, a 32-year-old Canadian dentist and father, who was arrested by ICE after a hearing notice was mailed to an address that government records showed was out of date. Newsweek reported that U.S. District Judge Michael J. Davis ruled on Sunday, Nov. 1, that the arrest and detention violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

The ruling does not give Lizardo permanent residency or settle his immigration case. It does bar the government from detaining, transferring or removing him again unless it first gets the court's permission.

How the case reached a federal judge

According to court filings cited by Newsweek, Lizardo came to the United States in 2019 on an F-1 student visa to study at the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry. The steps that followed:

• 2023: He graduated and married a U.S. citizen who had been his dental school classmate. In September 2023, his wife filed a petition for an alien relative, and he applied to adjust his status to permanent residency.
• January 2025: The relative petition was approved, according to the court. Their daughter was born in April 2025.
• January 2026: USCIS denied his application for permanent residence. The agency said he had not provided a certified Ontario court record tied to a 2012 charge that was withdrawn after diversion. Lizardo appealed, and the appeal was still pending when the judge ruled.
• March 26: An immigration court hearing was scheduled. Davis found that DHS sent the Notice to Appear to an address that conflicted with newer address information held by USCIS. Lizardo did not attend and was ordered removed in his absence.
• Oct. 23: Lizardo, accompanied by an attorney, went to an immigration interview in St. Paul. According to the order, that was when he first learned of the notice, the hearing and the removal order. Two ICE agents arrested him at the end of the interview, and he was taken to the Sherburne County Jail.
• Two days later: He asked an immigration court to rescind the removal order and reopen his case because he had not received notice.
• Oct. 28: The immigration court granted the motion, finding he had provided enough evidence that he lacked notice.
• Nov. 1: Davis granted a writ of habeas corpus and ordered Lizardo released in Minnesota by 6 p.m. that day.

What the judge found

Davis described the facts of the case as “appalling,” according to Newsweek. He found an obvious risk that Lizardo had been wrongly deprived of his liberty. He also criticized the government for acknowledging a significant USCIS mistake while offering no relief.

Federal officials had argued the case should be dismissed because Lizardo's proceedings had been reopened and he was now held under a different provision of immigration law. Davis rejected that argument. He found no new warrant or custody determination supporting the detention, and he said the government had not shown evidence that Lizardo was a flight risk.

The judge noted that Lizardo had attended immigration appointments when he received notice, kept USCIS informed of address changes and maintained family and community ties. “It strains credulity to think that such a petitioner would flee,” Davis wrote.

Lizardo was released on his own recognizance, and officials were ordered to return his personal belongings. Newsweek reported that it contacted DHS and Lizardo's legal team for comment.

Why it matters: notice, detention and the courts

The case turns on a basic question in immigration enforcement: what happens when official notices go to the wrong place. Lizardo was ordered removed without knowing a hearing had been scheduled, and he was detained when he showed up voluntarily with a lawyer for a scheduled interview. The ruling shows that a person in that position can ask a federal court to review the detention while the immigration case continues.

The decision also adds to a broader pattern. Newsweek noted that federal judges and the Trump administration have repeatedly clashed over the limits of ICE's authority, especially on due process. It said the administration and DHS officials have often criticized rulings that restrict enforcement, accusing some judges of overstepping and obstructing its agenda.

What happens next

Lizardo's immigration proceedings remain reopened after the removal order was rescinded, and his appeal of the permanent residency denial was still pending at the time of the ruling. If the government wants to detain him again, the court said it must identify its legal authority and any materially changed circumstances. It would also have to show by clear and convincing evidence that release conditions could not reasonably ensure his appearance and community safety.

Around Prague, based on reporting by Newsweek