Full Breakdown
Federal Appeals Courts Reject Trump Administration’s Mandatory Detention Policy
7/31/2026, 11:01:06 PM
Core Rulings Overturn Mandatory Detention
On Thursday, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals each issued 2-1 decisions holding that the Trump administration’s policy of mandatory detention for most immigrants in removal proceedings is unlawful. The 9th Circuit opinion was authored by Judge Daniel Bress, a Trump appointee, and joined by Judge M. Margaret McKeown. The 7th Circuit majority was written by Judge Joshua Kolar, a Biden appointee, with Judge Candace Jackson-Akiwumi concurring. Both rulings read the 1996 Immigration and Nationality Act as limiting mandatory detention to individuals apprehended at the border or identified as flight risks or dangers.
Background & Context
The 1996 law was intended to require detention only for those caught crossing the border or shortly thereafter. In July 2025 DHS issued guidance expanding “mandatory detention” to virtually all non-citizens in ICE custody, eliminating bond hearings for millions of long-time residents and prompting a wave of habeas-corpus petitions.
Data & Statistics
- Six circuits now reject the policy; two uphold it.
- More than 460 federal judges have ruled against mandatory detention in over 10,000 cases.
- The 7th Circuit decision could affect detainees in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, where ICE held over 1,000 people at the start of July.
Official Statements & Responses
Criticism & Opposition
- Judge Carlos Bea dissented, arguing that the 1996 amendment supports the administration’s reading.
- Judge Diane Sykes wrote a solo dissent asserting that only the Supreme Court can resolve the split.
On-the-Ground Reports
Legal director Matt Adams of the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project called the ruling “a major victory” for detainees in Washington, noting that immigration judges in Tacoma had previously ignored a district-court order requiring bond hearings. In Wisconsin, immigrant Jaciel Cirrus Rojas, who spent nine months in custody, was released on bond after a California district court vacated the mandatory-detention rule, only to face renewed detention attempts shortly before the 7th Circuit ruling.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the number of detainees who may become eligible for bond hearings, citing “hundreds” in the Pacific Northwest and “over 1,000” in the 7th Circuit’s jurisdiction. No definitive post-ruling tally has been released.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Although no reading of the complicated and interrelated textual provisions at issue here is without some shortcomings, the historical understanding of the statute is the better one,” — Daniel Bress
- “Detention without sufficient purpose, or indefinitely prolonged detention, threatens due process,” — Joshua Kolar
What’s Next
The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to review the mandatory-detention issue, and the ACLU has joined the request. With appellate courts split 6-2 and lower-court rulings overwhelmingly against the policy, the Supreme Court is expected to address the matter in the upcoming term.
