Federal Judge Strikes Down DHS Mandatory Detention Policy, Opening Access to Bond Hearings for Thousands of Immigrants

A recent federal court decision may dramatically change the landscape of immigration detention. In a major ruling, Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes of the Central District of California struck down a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy that had required many immigrants who entered the United States without inspection to remain in detention throughout their removal proceedings—without any opportunity to request a bond hearing.

This decision could restore access to release on bond for thousands of immigrants who have been held under mandatory detention since the policy was implemented in July.

Background: DHS Policy Eliminated Bond Eligibility for Many Immigrants

In July, DHS issued a nationwide directive instructing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to treat most immigrants arrested inside the United States and deemed inadmissible as “applicants for admission.” Under this classification, individuals—even those who had been living in the U.S. for years—became ineligible to request release on bond.

This represented a major departure from decades of practice. Historically, immigrants who entered without inspection could still request bond from an immigration judge, so long as they were not subject to other mandatory detention categories (such as certain criminal convictions). Judges would evaluate factors such as community ties, flight risk, and any public-safety concerns before deciding whether release was appropriate.

The July policy effectively eliminated access to this individualized assessment, forcing thousands to remain detained regardless of their background or circumstances.

Class Action Challenges the Policy

Shortly after the new policy was announced, immigrant-rights advocates filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of four individuals detained at an ICE facility in California. Each had been denied access to a bond hearing solely because they had entered the country without inspection.

On July 28, Judge Sykes issued a temporary restraining order preventing the government from applying the policy to the four named petitioners. Following that initial relief, attorneys sought and obtained class-wide protection.

The Court’s Ruling: Policy Struck Down and Class Certified

Judge Sykes certified a class that includes:

  • Immigrants who entered or will enter the United States without inspection, and

  • Individuals who were not detained immediately when they crossed into the U.S., but were later taken into custody and labeled as “applicants for admission” under the policy.

In her ruling, Judge Sykes held that DHS’s approach was inconsistent with long-established immigration law and unlawfully deprived immigrants of the procedural right to a bond hearing.

As a result, individuals previously blocked from seeking bond may now request a hearing before an immigration judge to determine whether detention is necessary.

What This Means for Immigrants in Removal Proceedings

This decision does not guarantee release. Instead, it restores the right to a bond hearing—an individualized assessment in which an immigration judge decides:

  • Whether the immigrant poses a danger to the community,

  • Whether they are likely to appear for future hearings, and

  • Whether any conditions of release could ensure compliance.

For many, this is a critical lifeline. Bond hearings allow individuals to reunite with family, access legal counsel more easily, and better prepare their cases while living outside detention.

Matt Adams, the lead attorney in the case, emphasized the significance of the ruling:
“Anyone in the country who’s in this position within removal proceedings and is being denied a bond hearing because they first entered without inspection or without being admitted, is now able to get a bond hearing—just like they were for the last 30 years.”

Why This Decision Matters

The ruling is particularly impactful for:

  • Long-term residents who entered without inspection years ago,

  • Immigrants with no criminal history,

  • Individuals detained after traffic stops or workplace raids, and

  • Families hoping to reunite with detained loved ones.

It also reinforces important due-process principles: detention should not be automatic, and each person deserves an individualized review rather than a blanket presumption of detention.

Next Steps and Legal Assistance

It is likely DHS may appeal or issue new guidance in response to the ruling. For now, however, immigrants who were previously denied access to bond hearings may be eligible to request one.

Attorneys representing detained individuals should:

  • Review each client’s custody status immediately,

  • Request a bond hearing from the immigration court where appropriate, and

  • Prepare evidence demonstrating community ties, family support, and other positive factors.

Immigrants or family members seeking assistance should consult with an experienced immigration attorney to determine eligibility and next steps.