Appellate Rulings Deepen Split on Trump Administration Indefinite Immigrant Detention Policy
Two federal appeals courts issued rulings on Thursday striking down the Trump administration’s policy of detaining immigrants who crossed the border illegally years ago and holding them indefinitely without a bond hearing. The legal foundation of the policy rests on classifying undocumented immigrants as continually “seeking admission” regardless of their length of time in the country, a practice that has faced constitutional challenges over potential violations of Fifth Amendment due process guarantees.
Judicial Breakdown Across the Ninth and Seventh Circuits
The U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit—which covers California and other Western states—and the Seventh Circuit—encompassing Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin—both rejected the administration’s statutory interpretation. Thursday’s decisions were split: the Ninth Circuit majority consisted of Judges M. Margaret McKeown and Daniel A. Bress, with Judge Carlos T. Bea dissenting in support of the policy. In the Seventh Circuit, Judges Candace Jackson-Akiwumi and Joshua P. Kolar formed the majority, while Judge Diane S. Sykes dissented. The Seventh Circuit had previously issued a narrower ruling that stopped short of a majority conclusion regarding the policy’s legality.
Broad Circuit Court Divisions Prompt Calls for Supreme Court Review
The latest decisions widen an existing split among appellate courts nationwide. The Second, Sixth, 10th, and 11th circuits have also ruled against indefinite detention, whereas the Fifth and Eighth circuits have upheld the practice. Highlighting the deepening judicial fracture, all three judges involved in the Seventh Circuit ruling—including the majority and the dissenting Judge Sykes, a George W. Bush appointee—urged the Supreme Court to intervene. Sykes wrote that only the high court can establish uniformity and settle the question permanently, adding that she anticipates action soon.
Pending Supreme Court Petitions and Broader Legal Tests
Currently, three separate petitions are pending before the Supreme Court to review rulings originating from the Fifth, Second, and Sixth circuits, with two submitted by the administration and one by the A.C.L.U. These impending considerations arrive in the wake of high court rulings concerning birthright citizenship and Temporary Protected Status. Consequently, any decision on indefinite detention will serve as another legal test for the administration’s aggressive deportation initiatives.
