Supreme Court Takes Up Detention Without Bond Hearings

On June 15, 2026, U.S. Supreme Court granted review of a Trump-administration appeal challenging a 2nd U.S. Circuit ruling that obliges bond hearings for non-citizens held for “unreasonably prolonged” periods after conviction of aggravated felonies. The case centers on two green-card holders, G.M. and Carol Black.

UsNews and World Report

Federal law mandates mandatory detention of non-citizens convicted of aggravated felonies. The Trump administration has expanded the categories subject to such detention. In 2016, the Court held the statute did not require bond hearings but left open whether the Constitution demands them after extended confinement.

CNNUsNews and World Report

The dispute pits Dominican permanent resident G.M. and Jamaican permanent resident Carol Black against the Trump administration; the ACLU, represented by attorney Cecillia Wang, defends the men.

UsNews and World Report

2020: G.M. detained after assault conviction; released 2022 after 21 months. 2019-2020: Black detained; 2020: released on $15,000 bond. 2024: 2nd Circuit ruled prolonged detention without bond hearings unreasonable. Jan 2024: administration filed Supreme Court appeal; June 15, 2026: Court agreed to hear case, with arguments set for October.

UsNews and World Report

A ruling requiring bond hearings could curb the administration’s use of mandatory detention, affecting thousands of non-citizens in removal proceedings. Upholding the status quo would preserve broad detention authority and reinforce existing statutory interpretation.

CNN

The administration says the appellate requirement for clear-and-convincing evidence of flight risk imposes an undue burden. The ACLU argues the Fifth Amendment guarantees due-process, including bond hearings, for all detained non-citizens. The 2nd Circuit held the Constitution mandates such hearings after extended confinement.

CNN

ACLU attorney Cecillia Wang denounced months-long detention without bond hearings as a due-process violation that separates families and undermines constitutional protections.

CNN

The appellate opinion set no precise time limit for detention, leaving the standard unclear. Black’s 2025 exit raises a mootness claim, yet the ACLU argues the case remains essential for due-process safeguards. The 2016 Supreme Court decision left the constitutional question unresolved, creating a legal vacuum the present case seeks to fill.

UsNews and World Report

• “The court of appeals got it right, and we will defend our fundamental due process principles at the Supreme Court.” — Cecillia Wang, ACLU attorney

UsNews and World Report

• “The Constitution protects all of us, regardless of immigration status, from being locked away without due process,” — Cecillia Wang, ACLU attorney

UsNews and World Report

• “(U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) cannot detain immigrants - separating families and cutting people off from their communities - for months or even years on end without a bond hearing.” — Cecillia Wang, ACLU attorney

UsNews and World Report

• “The court reads the statute as forbidding bail, hence forbidding a bail hearing, for these individuals,” — Justice Stephen Breyer (dissent, 2016)

CNN

The Court will hear oral arguments during its October term. A decision, expected by the end of that term, will determine whether prolonged immigration detention without bond hearings complies with constitutional due-process requirements.

CNN