An appeals court on Friday ruled the Trump administration can continue detaining certain illegal immigrants without giving them bond hearings while their immigration cases move through court.
The Friday ruling by the full 17-member 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was a major victory for President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda. The majority ruled that the Fifth Amendment did not require bond hearings for three men who entered the United States unlawfully but were never legally admitted.
“Big win in the Fifth Circuit on mandatory detention for illegal aliens, a principle codified in 1996 legislation but ignored by the deep state for decades,” DHS counsel James Percival said on Friday.
Judge Cory Wilson, an appointee from Trump’s first term, wrote the 159-page majority opinion in Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega. He was joined by eight other judges.
The men’s detention “presented no constitutional issues” that required their release, Wilson wrote. Judge Priscilla Richman, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, agreed with the result but not the majority’s legal reasoning. Seven judges dissented.
The men were protected by the Fifth Amendment, Wilson wrote. But because they had never been admitted to the United States, they were not entitled to extra hearings beyond those provided by Congress.
“Due process does not entitle them to additional proceedings beyond what Congress has provided before they may be detained pending removal,” Wilson wrote.
The 5th Circuit had already ruled that federal immigration law did not give people in these cases a statutory right to a bond hearing. Congress has broad authority over immigration and can set rules for noncitizens that would not be acceptable if applied to citizens, Wilson wrote.
The Trump administration adopted the detention policy last year. It began treating illegal immigrants who had lived in the U.S. for years as people “seeking admission,” the same legal category used for people who had just entered the country.
That interpretation placed them under a provision of immigration law that requires detention while removal cases proceed. It also prevented them from asking an immigration judge to decide whether they should be released on bond.
The policy led to a wave of lawsuits from illegal immigrants who said their detention was unlawful.
The decision added to a major split among federal appeals courts. At least nine other appeals courts, including the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th Circuits, have ruled against the administration’s interpretation. The 8th Circuit has upheld the policy.
The Supreme Court agreed Oct. 1 to review the broader legal dispute in Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha. The justices are scheduled to hear arguments Nov. 4 and are expected to issue a ruling by June.
That case will address whether federal law requires the government to detain people who entered illegally and were never admitted. Friday’s ruling addressed a separate question: whether the Constitution requires bond hearings even when the law requires detention.
In February, a 5th Circuit panel upheld the Trump policy as a matter of statutory interpretation. Some lower-court judges in the circuit nevertheless ordered bond hearings or released detainees after finding that prolonged detention violated due process.
HIGH COURT WILL REVIEW TRUMP’S MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
A separate 5th Circuit panel later ruled that the Constitution required bond hearings in three cases. The full court vacated that ruling in July and agreed to reconsider the constitutional question.
The petitioners are represented by the National Immigration Project, the American Immigration Council, and Garza & Narvaez PLLC.