A Trump-appointed federal judge helped deliver a fresh legal blow to the administration’s effort to hold some migrants without bond hearings. In a 2-1 ruling Thursday, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said migrants living inside the United States cannot automatically be detained without a chance to seek release while deportation cases move forward.
Judge Aaron Bress, appointed by President Donald Trump, wrote the majority opinion, joined by Judge M. Margaret McKeown, an appointee of President Bill Clinton. As reported by Denver7, Judge Carlos Bea, appointed by President George W. Bush, dissented.
The fight centers on a 2025 administration policy that interpreted the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act to require mandatory detention for some undocumented immigrants already living in the country. The Associated Press reported that the policy departed from the way previous administrations generally handled people arrested in the interior, where many could request bond hearings unless they had criminal records or presented other risks.
What The Ruling Does — And Does Not — Change
The decision does not mean every detained migrant must be released. According to Denver7, Bress wrote that people with qualifying criminal offenses can remain subject to mandatory detention, while immigration judges may still deny bond when someone presents a flight risk or danger to the community.
What the ruling rejects is the government’s broadest interpretation of the law: treating long-term residents arrested inside the country as though they were newly arriving at the border and therefore ineligible for bond hearings altogether. The shift has already produced thousands of habeas petitions from detained immigrants seeking federal review and possible release.
A Growing Split That Could Reach The Supreme Court
Thursday’s decision deepens an unusually consequential circuit split. AP reported that four other federal appeals courts have rejected the administration’s position, while the Fifth and Eighth circuits have sided with the White House, making Supreme Court review increasingly likely.
The ruling is binding within the 9th Circuit, whose jurisdiction includes the West Coast, but it does not automatically settle detention disputes elsewhere. For Colorado readers, the case arrives amid growing scrutiny of immigration-court operations: Hoodline previously reported on University of Denver students tracking hearings at the Aurora immigration court as detainees and attorneys navigate the shifting rules.
