Charles F. Eick
How Judge Eick rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Eick decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In one reviewed consent petition, the court found that re-detention violated due process and ordered release on the petitioner’s prior supervision conditions.
“Based on the factual allegations in the Petition, the Court finds that Petitioners April 22, 2026 arrest and re-detention violated Petitioner’s due process rights.”
Several reviewed partial grants required a prompt bond hearing and placed the clear-and-convincing burden on the government to justify continued detention.
“the Government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the detention of Petitioner is necessary because Petitioner is an unacceptable danger to the community or an unacceptable risk of flight.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Pursuant to the ‘Order for Entry of Judgment,’ the Petition is granted in part. Within seven (7) days of the entry of Judgment, Respondents must provide Petitioner (A# 246-147-456) with a bond hearing before an immigration judge at which the Government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the detention of Petitioner is necessary because Petitioner is an unacceptable danger to the community or an unacceptable risk of flight.”
“It is ordered that Judgment be entered: (1) requiring Respondents to release Petitioner from detention immediately.”
“It is ordered that the Petition is granted in part and Judgment shall be entered requiring Respondents to release Petitioner (A# 074-822-864) immediately, subject to appropriate conditions.”
“MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick: denying 9 Ex Parte Application for Protective Order for Stay of Removal.”
“It is ordered that the Judgment be entered granting the Petition in part and requiring Respondents to provide Petitioner (A# 201-371-851) with a bond hearing before an immigration judge within fourteen (14) days at which the burden will be on the Government to justify Petitioner’s detention through clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner is an unacceptable danger or an unacceptable risk of flight.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Petition is denied and dismissed with prejudice. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.”
“It is ordered that Judgment be entered: (1) requiring Respondents to release Petitioner (A# 246-272-641) from detention immediately, subject to Petitioners previous conditions of supervision.”
“the Petition is granted in part and: (1) Respondents are ordered to release Petitioner (A# 246-218-601) from detention immediately, subject to the conditions of her previous supervision.”
“it is ordered that Judgment be entered: (1) requiring Respondents to release Petitioner (A# 240-407-869) from detention immediately.”
“It is ordered that Judgment be entered: (1) requiring Respondents to release Petitioner (A# 243-107-786) from detention immediately; and (2) enjoining Respondents from re-detaining Petitioner unless such detention is ordered following an individualized custody determination before a neutral decisionmaker.”
“Based on the factual allegations in the Petition, the Court finds that Petitioners April 22, 2026 arrest and re-detention violated Petitioner’s due process rights. Therefore, it is ordered that judgment be entered: (1) requiring Respondents to release Petitioner (A# 246-395-523) from detention immediately on the same conditions of supervision existing prior to Petitioner’s April 22, 2026 re-detention.”
“Pursuant to the ‘Order for Entry of Judgment,’ the Petition is granted in part. Within seven (7) days of the entry of Judgment, Respondents must provide Petitioner (A 073-868-577) with a bond hearing before an immigration judge at which the Government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the detention of Petitioner is necessary because Petitioner is an unacceptable danger to the community or an unacceptable risk of flight.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed outcome dockets are heavily concentrated in 2026 immigration-detention matters. Eighteen petitions had grounded filing-to-decision intervals; those short intervals do not describe the judge’s wider consent and referral caseload.
Draft for Judge Eick with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Eick, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Eick's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace