Ekeh

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. Ekeh has not cooperated fully and honestly with immigration officials to secure the necessary *639 travel documents from Liberia or Nigeria and thus has not met his burden to show there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. See Lema v. INS, 341 F.3d 853, 855 (9th Cir.2003).

While we review the district court’s denial of Ekeh’s habeas petition de novo, we review the INS’s factual findings for substantial evidence, “reversing only if the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the facts were as the alien alleged.” Id. Substantial evidence supports the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) finding that Ekeh was not “cooperating with ICE’s efforts to remove [him],” because he mislead ICE concerning his true identity and because he had not provided the Nigerian consul with information sufficient to establish his father’s citizenship.

The Liberian Embassy officer who interviewed Ekeh indicated that Ekeh “seemed evasive at answering questions, could not remember dates and locations of schools in Liberia” and doubted that Mr. Ekeh was answering truthfully. The…

MEMORANDUM **

Henry Ekeh has been held in detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (a) for 30 months pending his removal from the United States. We grant his habeas corpus petition and order his release.

In Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 689 , 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001), the Supreme Court held that § 1231(a) “does not permit indefinite detention.” The Court therefore fashioned a presumptive rule that after six months of custody, the alien should be released if there is “good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” Id. at 701, 121 S.Ct. 2491 . Applying that rule, we have held that “when an alien refuses to cooperate fully and honestly with officials to secure travel documents from a foreign government, the alien cannot meet his or her burden to show there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” Lema v. INS, 341 F.3d 853, 856 (9th Cir.2003). Thus, aliens who fail to supply information or refuse to apply for travel documentation may be subjected to continued detention. See id. at 857 (failure to supply information); Pelich v. INS, 329 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir.2003)…