CLARKSBURG — The two Don Patron Mexican Restaurant workers detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement are fighting to have their cases heard in West Virginia.The federal government petitioned to have their cases transferred to Pennsylvania. ICE detained Erick Leonel Cristal Cumes and Jose Cruz Castro during immigration raids in Weston and Bridgeport on May 28. Both men filed habeas corpus petitions to challenge the validity of their detention. However, a hearing held Thursday in U.S. District Court in Clarksburg focused on what the appropriate venue would be over the validity of their habeas corpus arguments.Choice of venue has an impact on what outcomes these men face."Cases go to Pennsylvania to die," Ocklawaha Holt, attorney representing Cumes and Castro on the Habeas Petition, said. "They stagnate. They don't move. They take forever. In West Virginia, we actually move a lot faster than Pennsylvania. So if someone's wrongfully detained in Pennsylvania, they'll be wrongfully detained for much, much longer."Jonathan Sidney, from the Climate Defense Project, was the lead attorney in court for Cumes and Castro. Attorney Jordan Palmer argued on the government's behalf. U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Kleeh of the Northern District of West Virginia presided in Clarksburg.The first part of Cumes' hearing focused on the timeline, as Kleeh tried to ascertain where Cumes was when Sidney filed a habeas petition on his behalf. The timing mattered because Palmer's argument rested on whether or not he had crossed into Pennsylvania by the time Sidney filed his petition. If that was the case, Palmer argued, the case belongs to Pennsylvania's jurisdiction and not West Virginia's.Sidney indicated Cumes may have already have been in Pennsylvania by the time he filed his petition. But, Sidney told the judge these types of cases are fast moving, and he doesn't know where a client is at a particular point in time when he files paperwork on their behalf. Sidney also cited a a 1960 Supreme Court case which made what jurisdiction depends on where the case originated.Kleeh asked Sidney if timing was irrelevant to the transfer issue. Sidney argued it was not primary, but also not irrelevant. Another significant moment was when Sidney pointed out the government was not arguing the validity of Cumes' petition, but the place of hearing.Castro's case had less ambiguity than Cumes'. Sidney admitted he couldn't argue whether or not Castro was in the state when he filed the paperwork, because Castro was much closer to the state border when he was detained. However, he told Kleeh he still hoped to convince the court that he did have the discretion to rule on the habeas corpus question.Palmer argued Castro's case should move to Pennsylvania because Castro will be in the state for the foreseeable future.Holt said ultimately the choice will come down to the judge's discretion, of where he wants the case to be heard. As for the habeas corpus petition itself, Holt said there was an administrative search warrant, but no arrest warrant. The question of whether Castro and Cumes were detained in a legal manner will have to wait another day.Sidney pointed out extending Castro's stay in detention so the courts can decide a procedural matter only exacerbates any potential miscarriage of justice if Castro was illegally detained.Kleeh took the matter into advisement and did not rule on the cases Thursday.Norma and Jose Martinez are Castro's sister and brother-in-law, and are U.S. citizens. They think Castro's case should be tried in West Virginia. They said Castro had built a life in the United States over the past 20 years. In those two decades, Castro never had any kind of ticket or criminal activity, he said."I just hope the judge, finds in his ....hear the justice," Norma Martinez said. "I understand they are here without the status, but they are not criminals. They not killers, they are not bad people. They're just working to provide for their families."