Supreme Court to Hear Case on Detention of Criminal Noncitizens

The Supreme Court is being asked to consider a case that could significantly alter how federal authorities detain noncitizens with criminal records during lengthy deportation proceedings. Legal experts warn that a decision in favor of expanded bond hearing rights could make it more difficult for the government to keep individuals accused or convicted of serious crimes, such as murder or aggravated felonies, in detention.

The case, Genalo v. D.C., centers on a Second Circuit precedent that mandates bond hearings for certain noncitizens when their immigration detention becomes "unreasonably prolonged." At such hearings, the government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the detainee poses a flight risk or a danger to the community.

The Trump administration is petitioning the Supreme Court to review the case, which involves a Dominican citizen with multiple criminal convictions who has been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) while fighting removal. The administration seeks to overturn the Second Circuit's ruling before the circuit court issues its own decision, a process known as certiorari before judgment.

Chad Mizelle, former acting associate attorney general, told Fox News Digital that the case involves "criminal aliens" accused or convicted of serious offenses. "We are talking about criminal aliens here," Mizelle stated. "Accused or convicted of murder. Accused or convicted of child rape. Accused or convicted of grievous harm upon another human being." He expressed concern that a ruling against the government could lead to such individuals being released into communities.

The individual at the heart of the case, identified as D.C., is a 62-year-old Dominican citizen with several criminal convictions. These include charges related to drug offenses, possession of a forged instrument, strangulation, assault, and contempt of court. After a period of evasion and state sentencing, he was detained by ICE in April 2024 while his removal proceedings continued.

The administration's pursuit of this case comes after two other cases with similar legal questions became moot. One detainee's case was resolved after he was removed from the U.S., and another's became moot when he received a pardon for the conviction that formed the basis of his deportation proceedings.

Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, emphasized the nationwide implications of the case. "This is an issue that's going to affect criminal aliens across the country," Severino said. She suggested that a favorable ruling for D.C. could impose additional hurdles on the government and potentially lead to more frequent releases of individuals awaiting deportation.

Michael Morley, a law professor at Florida State University, noted that the Second Circuit's ruling places a higher burden of proof on the government. "If the Supreme Court winds up affirming what the Second Circuit held, that means it's going to be harder for the government to be able to detain this particular population of criminal aliens or terrorism-linked aliens," Morley explained. "It means that these criminal aliens who are already subject to removal proceedings are more likely to be released into the community while those underlying removal proceedings continue."

The Supreme Court has not yet formally agreed to hear the case.