The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit made a big decision on May 11, 2026. It ruled that the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy for immigrants is unconstitutional. This change affects noncitizens in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee who face removal from the country.
Background on the Policy
In July 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) changed how it handles detention. Before this, many noncitizens arrested inside the U.S. fell under Section 1226(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. This section allows immigration judges to decide on bond after looking at each person’s case.
The new policy treated people who entered without inspection as “applicants for admission” under Section 1226(b). These people had lived in the U.S. for years, often far from the border. The government said this made detention mandatory, with no bond hearings. In October 2025, the Board of Immigration Appeals backed this view in a published decision.
Details of the Contreras-Cervantes Case
The case is Contreras-Cervantes v. Raycraft. A 2-1 panel of judges said the policy violates due process. They ruled that long-term residents cannot be shifted to mandatory detention without a hearing. Judge Eric Murphy dissented, but the majority held firm.
The court focused on fairness. Detention affects daily life, like access to lawyers, gathering evidence, and family support. Without a hearing, people lose these chances while fighting their cases from jail.
What the Ruling Changes
Noncitizens in the Sixth Circuit can now request bond hearings if they were denied one due to the policy. Immigration judges will check flight risk and danger to the community under 8 C.F.R. ยง 1003.19. Release is not automatic. Factors like criminal history or past immigration issues can still lead to detention.
To prepare for a hearing, people often need documents. These include police reports, proof of address, family letters, job records, and tax forms. Acting fast is key, as custody cases move quickly.
Practical Effects in the Region
This applies only to Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Immigration courts there must follow the ruling. Detainees can ask for a custody redetermination. Those with serious crimes or prior removal orders may face other detention rules.
Advocates welcome the decision. My Khanh Ngo from the Michigan ACLU called it a correct rejection of detention without process. Groups like the New York Civil Liberties Union see it as a win against mass detention without review.
Circuit Split and Future Steps
The ruling creates a divide among courts. The Second Circuit also rejected the policy. But the Fifth and Eighth Circuits upheld it. This split may lead to Supreme Court review, as happens often with immigration detention rules.
The government might seek a rehearing or appeal. For now, the decision controls in the Sixth Circuit. People in custody should raise it in their cases right away. Free resources are at justice.gov/eoir, and lawyer referrals come from AILA.
Key Takeaways
- Bond hearing rights return for many noncitizens in four states.
- Mandatory detention without process is unconstitutional for long-term residents.
- Hearings focus on risk, but release depends on the judge’s view.
Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Immigration cases vary by facts and location. Talk to an immigration attorney for your situation.
Conclusion
The Sixth Circuit’s ruling restores basic rights to bond hearings for noncitizens in its region. It challenges a policy that limited due process during removal fights. While changes are narrow, they offer real hope for those detained. Families and advocates now have a tool to seek release, pending further court action.
Conversation
0 Comments