Erick Fernando Luna Rivera, a federal immigration detainee, sought emergency relief through Maria Andino, who claimed to act as his 'next friend' in a pro se capacity. Andino filed both a motion for temporary restraining order and a motion to appoint counsel on Rivera's behalf, with the government subsequently opposing the TRO request.
Judge Drozd explained that while federal law permits 'next friend' status for those unable to seek relief themselves due to 'mental incompetence or inaccessibility,' such representatives cannot proceed pro se in federal court. 'Courts have routinely adhered to the general rule prohibiting pro se plaintiffs from pursuing claims on behalf of others in a representative capacity,' Drozd wrote, citing Ninth Circuit precedent. The judge noted that other Eastern District of California judges had reached similar conclusions in recent immigration detention cases.
The court granted Rivera's motion for appointment of counsel under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B), which authorizes counsel for financially eligible petitioners seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 when 'the interests of justice so require.' Government attorneys conceded they found no material factual differences between Rivera's case and prior decisions where the court had appointed counsel in similar immigration detention matters.
The court referred the matter to the Federal Public Defender's Office to determine Rivera's financial eligibility and identify counsel. Judge Drozd encouraged appointed counsel to coordinate with Andino, noting the 'helpful information' she brought to the court's attention. The TRO motion denial was without prejudice, allowing for refiling once proper counsel is secured.