Immigration Court Expands Mandatory Detention Nationwide

Judges barred from granting bond to immigrants who entered without authorization, the Board of Immigration Appeals ruled Friday, expanding mandatory detention to thousands behind bars and millions more across the U.S.

The ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals cements a Trump-era policy denying bond hearings to undocumented immigrants, marking a significant shift in immigration enforcement that could prolong detention for years and intensify court backlogs.

Key Details

  • The Board’s decision binds immigration judges to hold all immigrants present without admission for the duration of their removal proceedings.
  • Immigration courts now lose discretion to release detainees on bond, regardless of flight risk or danger.
  • Advocates warn of harsher detention conditions and mounting legal challenges in federal courts.

The policy was introduced nationally in July via a memo from Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and swiftly upheld by the appeals board on grounds that unauthorized entrants “must be detained” until their cases conclude. Immigration courts, overseen by the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, have traditionally released many noncitizens on bond after assessing individual risk.

Immigrant rights attorneys decry the move as punitive, arguing it is designed to break detainees’ resolve and force voluntary deportation. “Literally millions of people are now subject to being held without bond,” said Niels W. Frenzen of USC Gould School of Law.

Legal challenges are already underway. Federal judges in several circuits have held that denying bond hearings violates due process, and a class-action lawsuit was filed Sept. 3 in the Central District of California seeking to block the no-bond rule.

Implications for Detainees

  • Prolonged Detention: Removal proceedings can last months or years, during which detainees remain confined.
  • Court Backlogs: Increased detainee numbers threaten to overwhelm immigration court schedules.
  • Humanitarian Concerns: Advocates warn of deteriorating conditions in ICE facilities and mental health impacts from extended confinement.

ICE did not comment directly on the ruling, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review highlighted that the decision now serves as binding precedent. Critics say the board’s interpretation equates long‐term residents with newly arriving border crossers, stripping judges of longstanding authority to consider individual circumstances.

Next Steps

  • Ongoing lawsuits in federal district courts will test the legality of the no-bond policy.
  • Immigration rights groups plan to file habeas petitions on behalf of high-risk detainees, including those with serious medical needs.
  • Congress faces renewed calls to revisit detention statutes and restore judicial discretion in bond determinations.

The expanded mandatory detention rule represents the most sweeping limitation on immigration court releases in decades and signals a harder line in the administration’s enforcement strategy.