A federal judge threw out an administrative board’s decision endorsing the Trump administration’s policy of mandatory detention by vacating the Board of Immigration Appeals’ ruling after finding the administration had failed to comply with her earlier order declaring unlawful the underlying policy of denying detainees the chance to seek release on bond.
What changed
U.S. District Judge Sunshine Sykes in Riverside, California, vacated the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals after finding the administration had failed to comply with her earlier order declaring unlawful the underlying policy of denying detainees the chance to seek release on bond. Sykes called the administration’s actions “shameless” and accused it of trying to continue its “campaign of illegal action” by still refusing bond hearings despite her prior ruling.
The ruling, in a class action lawsuit that covers migrants nationwide, is more sweeping than decisions by hundreds of other U.S. judges holding the policy is unlawful and ordering detainees to be freed or given bond hearings.
Why it matters
The ruling means the board’s decision can no longer be used by immigration judges to deny bond hearings. For practitioners, this eliminates a key administrative argument that DHS and immigration judges had been using to support blanket detention.
The Trump administration had bucked decades of precedent in determining those arrested by ICE after spending years in the U.S. should also be denied a bond hearing. Judge Sykes’s order now requires that all detainees—including long-term U.S. residents—receive a bond hearing unless they fall within narrow statutory exceptions. Sykes said despite her earlier ruling, migrants were continually being denied bond hearings, and instead were forced to file habeas corpus petitions to seek their release.
This class-action ruling binds immigration courts nationwide and forecloses reliance on the vacated BIA decision. You should expect DHS to appeal, but in the interim, detainees have a clearer path to bond hearings.
Way forward
- Review detainee files immediately: If you represent anyone currently detained under this policy and denied a bond hearing, the court order now backs your motion for a bond hearing. File promptly.
- Cite Sykes’ order in bond-hearing motions: The vacated BIA decision is no longer valid authority. Focus arguments on the detainee’s ties to the U.S., family members, and length of residence—all factors that should weigh in a bond hearing now guaranteed by law.
- Monitor appellate developments: The Department of Justice is expected to appeal. Monitor the Ninth Circuit docket and local immigration court updates.
- Document compliance: If immigration judges are still denying bond hearings post-Sykes, document it carefully for potential follow-up litigation or habeas petitions.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is provided by software company, not a law firm. You should consult a licensed immigration attorney or accredited representative in your jurisdiction before relying on this information for case strategy or filing decisions. Immigration policy and court decisions change frequently; always verify current law and procedure against the primary source linked above and current case law before advising clients or filing.