A divided federal appeals court on Thursday declared the Trump administration's policy of holding immigrants without a chance for release on bond to be illegal, stating it "harkens back to some of the darkest moments in our country's history," including the World War II-era mass detention of Japanese Americans.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals became the ninth federal appeals court to reject the administration's mandatory detention policy, a central component of its broader deportation efforts. This ruling creates a split among federal appellate courts, as two other appeals courts have upheld the policy, increasing the likelihood that the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the matter.
The differing circuit court decisions mean that immigrants in some regions of the country are eligible for bond hearings, while those in other areas, such as Texas and Louisiana, face greater obstacles in seeking release.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a statement asserting its confidence in its legal stance on mandatory detention and noted it had requested the Supreme Court's review.
Under prior administrations, most noncitizens apprehended within the U.S. who did not have a criminal record were typically granted the opportunity to seek a bond hearing while their immigration cases were processed. Mandatory detention had generally been applied to individuals detained at the border.
In July, immigration officials issued guidance that extended mandatory detention to immigrants residing within the U.S. interior. The Trump administration has contended that Congress's 1996 immigration law amendments authorized mandatory detention beyond the border, a provision that previous administrations had not enforced.
"President Trump and Secretary Mullin are now enforcing the law as it was actually written to keep America safe," DHS stated, referencing Secretary Markwayne Mullin.
However, the 4th Circuit, aligning with most other federal appeals courts, has rejected this interpretation. Michael K.T. Tan, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead attorney in the case before the 4th Circuit, commented that "The government’s track record speaks for itself at this point."
The 2-1 decision was authored by Judges Barbara Keenan, nominated by President Barack Obama, and Nicole Berner, nominated by President Joe Biden. Judge Allison Rushing, appointed by President Donald Trump, dissented.
Writing for the majority, Judge Berner argued that if Congress had intended to permit the mandatory detention of millions of individuals, it would have provided clearer language in the 1996 act. She stated that the administration's policy "implicate[s] the constitutional due process rights of millions of noncitizens in our country, many of whom have lived, worked, and become integral parts of their communities, for years."
Berner's majority opinion drew parallels to historical injustices, writing, "Mass detention of marginalized individuals without due process harkens back to some of the darkest moments in our country's history." She specifically referenced the internment of Japanese Americans and the mass detention of Chinese immigrants in the late 1800s, adding that the Trump administration's policy was even more extensive than "those shameful and abhorrent past detentions."