BURLINGTON — A federal judge in Vermont is weighing whether she has the authority over a case of a Harvard Medical School scientist from Russia who claims she is being wrongly held in custody by federal authorities.

Chief Judge Christina Reiss heard arguments Wednesday morning in U.S. District Court in Burlington in a case brought by KseniiaPetrova, a genetics researcher. 

Petrova, 30, has been held in detention since February when, according to court filings, she arrived at Boston Logan International Airport from France and did not properly declare research samples — frog embryos. She was eventually placed in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Petrova, who had her visa revoked by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, was held at Vermont’s women’s prison in South Burlington for about a week before she was transferred to an ICE facility in Louisiana, where she has been held ever since. 

Petrova’s case is the third high-profile immigration matter to come before federal courts in Vermont since President Donald Trump took office in January. The other cases involved a Columbia University student living in Vermont and a Tufts University student who was held in custody for a short time in the state. Both students have since been ordered released from custody by separate federal judges in Vermont.  

Petrova brought her legal action, a habeas petition, in Vermont while still in custody in the state, alleging she was being unlawfully held by federal authorities. The federal government filed a motion seeking to dismiss that complaint, contending that the matter, at least at this point, should be playing out in an immigration court in Louisiana and that the federal court in Vermont lacked jurisdiction.

Reiss, the judge, listened during Wednesday’s hearing to more than an hour of arguments on the jurisdictional issue. 

She said as the hearing came to a close that she was taking the matter under advisement and set a bail hearing in the case for May 28.

“I will see you on May 28 at 10, unless I decide that the court has no authority to go forward,” Reiss told the attorneys as the hearing came to a close. “We may even have the hearing anyway, and I will tell you what I’ve determined with regard to that.”

Throughout the hearing, the judge challenged the positions of attorneys on both sides of the case, often interjecting questions as they spoke.

Reiss, speaking to Jeff Hartman, a trial attorney from the U.S Department of Justice who represented the Trump administration at Wednesday’s hearing, said an immigration court process could take months or years to play out.

“This is not going to happen anytime soon,” Reiss said to Hartman, adding, “And if she is, in fact, unlawfully detained, that’s exactly what a habeas petition is for.”

“If she believes that her removal proceedings, which are ongoing in Louisiana, are unlawful or contrary to the Constitution, you know, she can bring a claim,” Hartman replied. “We think the proper venue for that question is Louisiana, where she’s detained.”

Reiss questioned that response. 

“But in this case, her habeas petition was filed here when she was here,” Reiss said. 

“And, the Supreme Court has said, ‘Yeah, even if you move somebody the court retains habeas jurisdiction,’” the judge added. “Otherwise it would create an adverse, perverse incentive to move somebody around the country and say, ‘Oh, now you’ve got to file in Louisiana. Oh, you’re in Ohio now, file there.’” 

Petrova took part in Wednesday’s hearing remotely from the ICE facility in Louisiana where she has been detained for the past three months. The courtroom gallery in Burlington was filled with her supporters, several wearing clothing emblazoned with “Harvard.” 

The case has received national media attention, and an essay from Petrova appeared this week in the New York Times titled “I Came to Study Aging. Now I’m Trapped in ICE Detention.” 

In the initial filing in federal court in Vermont, Petrova’s attorney described the incident leading to her custody as an “inadvertent failure to declare on a customs form non-hazardous, noninfectious, and non-toxic frog embryos that she was bringing to the United States at the request” of a leader of a researcher group at Harvard Medical School “under whose leadership she works.” 

Such cases, according to Petrova’s attorney Gregory Romanovsky, often result in a fine and the forfeiture of the undeclared items.  

Petrova, the filing stated, had entered the United States on a valid visa in May 2023 and had been conducting “groundbreaking scientific research” at Harvard. She had traveled in and out of the country several times since then without issue, the filing added. 

She traveled to Europe in late January, her attorney stated in the filing, and prior to her return, a leader of a research group at Harvard asked her to bring back samples of frog embryos from his scientific collaborators at the Institut Curie Centre de Recherche in France.

“She simply placed the samples in her luggage and did not declare them to CBP at the time of her entry” to the United States at Boston Logan International Airport, according to the filing. 

At the luggage conveyor belt, the filing stated, Petrova was approached by a CBP officer and escorted to a room for questioning and examination of luggage.

After finding the undeclared items, “and despite her attempts to explain,” the CBP officer marked her visa in her passport as “cancelled,” according to Petrova’s attorney. 

The officer then gave Petrova a choice, the filing stated, to withdraw her application for admission and apply for a new visa from overseas or face expedited removal and the possibility of being barred from admission to the United States for five years.

She asked that her application be withdrawn and requested to return to Paris, according to the filing. Petrova, the filing stated, said she had no fear of returning to France, but “did have a fear of returning to Russia, where she faced past persecution for her political activities.” 

The filing then stated, “CBP subsequently apprehended and detained” Petrova.

Petrova, in her New York Times essay, stated that she had been arrested in Russia for protesting the war in Ukraine.  

In a statement, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said Petrova was “lawfully” detained after “lying to federal officers about carrying substances into the country.” 

The statement added, “A subsequent K9 inspection uncovered undeclared petri dishes, containers of unknown substances, and loose vials of embryonic frog cells, all without proper permits.”

Petrova, in a court filing, denied the allegation of lying to federal officers, and her attorney reiterated that denial during Wednesday’s hearing.

Judge Reiss asked Hartman during the hearing Wednesday if the federal government was ultimately seeking to deport Petrova to Russia.

“Yes,” Hartman responded. 

Romanovsky, Petrova’s attorney, said after the hearing Wednesday that he looked forward to a bail hearing for his client later this month in federal court in Vermont. 

This story was republished with permission from VtDigger, which offers its reporting at no cost to local news organizations through its Community News Sharing Project. To support this work, please visit vtdigger.org/donate.