A federal judge in the United States has rejected a ruling by an administrative board that supported the Trump administration’s policy of imposing mandatory detention on individuals arrested during immigration enforcement. The judge, Sunshine Sykes, accused the administration of instilling fear in immigrants and violating the law recklessly.
Judge Sykes, based in Riverside, California, voided the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals for failing to comply with her earlier order deeming the policy of denying detainees the opportunity to seek release on bond unlawful. She emphasized that the administration had disregarded her previous ruling, which highlighted the illegal denial of detained immigrants’ release chances.
As per U.S. immigration law, mandatory detention is specified for “applicants for admission,” barring them from bond hearings while their cases progress in immigration courts. Contrary to established interpretations, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asserted last year that non-citizens already residing in the U.S. also fall under the category of applicants for admission.
The September decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals, a component of the U.S. Justice Department, adopted this stance, leading to a directive for detention by immigration judges nationwide. Judge Sykes, in her ruling, criticized the DHS for repeatedly implying that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations targeted only criminal non-citizens.
Sykes’s decision negates the board’s ruling, allowing immigration judges to conduct bond hearings for detained individuals. Niels Frenzen, a law professor representing the plaintiffs, expressed hope that thousands of arrested noncitizens would now receive bond hearings as directed by the court.
Matt Adams, an attorney for the plaintiffs, shared optimism that mandatory detention would be phased out, leading to a return to granting bond hearings by immigration judges. The White House deferred comment to the DHS, emphasizing their adherence to court decisions until challenged in the highest court.
The Department of Justice, responsible for overseeing the immigration appeals board, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The conflicting rulings on mass detention by U.S. courts underscore the ongoing legal debate and the implications for immigration policy under different administrations.