Immigrants who entered the country illegally do not have the right to post bail while they are in detention and undergoing deportation proceedings, even if they have established roots in the United States, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.
In a 10-7 ruling, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled that current immigration laws allow the federal government to hold detained immigrants until deportation, regardless of whether they have lived in the United States and have no criminal history.
Judge Cory Wilson, a Trump appointee, wrote in the court’s ruling that if undocumented immigrants have not been legally admitted to the United States, they are entitled only to the rights set forth by Congress in immigration laws. He added that if undocumented immigrants in detention wish to be released from detention, “they can do so at any time by agreeing to leave the country.”
In a concurring opinion, Justice Andrew Oldham agreed.
“Because these aliens are not legally admitted, they are afforded exactly the same due process rights as if they had passed through a legal port of entry – regardless of what rights Congress chooses to grant them,” Oldham wrote.
Justice Leslie Southwick, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in his dissent that the decision created an “impenetrable wall between the Constitution and these longtime residents.”
Rebecca Cassler, senior litigation attorney for the American Immigration Council, who argued the case before the 5th Circuit, said the court’s decision is an attack on constitutional due process rights, which have been guaranteed to everyone living in the United States, regardless of their immigration status.
“The right to due process is a fundamental constitutional protection, and it is intended to protect every person in this country. Because of today’s decision, this right is meaningless for immigrants in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi,” she said. “But the logic of the 5th Circuit’s decision threatens everyone in this country: When courts degrade the meaning of liberty for some, we all suffer the consequences.”
Mass deportation efforts
The case stems from the arrest of three men in Texas by state troopers between November 2025 and February 2026 during routine traffic stops. All three have lived in the country for at least 14 years, have worked during that time and have children who are U.S. citizens. The officers handed the men over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who detained them without allowing them to meet with a judge.
Ignacio Sosnava Rodriguez, Miguel Angel Gomez Alvarado and Alejandro Villegas Angel were finally released from ICE custody after federal judges ruled that their detention without the opportunity for a bond hearing violated the men’s rights to due process. The Trump administration appealed, arguing that federal immigration law says undocumented immigrants must be detained until deportation without a bond hearing — a policy it put in place in July 2025.
Friday’s decision is good news for the Trump administration, which has prioritized immigration enforcement as part of its mass deportation efforts.
“Big victory for the Fifth Circuit on mandatory detention of illegal aliens, a principle codified in 1996 legislation but ignored by the deep state for decades,” James Percival, an attorney with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said on social media, referring to the Clinton administration’s immigration law that expanded the list of immigrants who could be more easily deported.
“Rejecting due process”
Gracie Willis, an attorney with the National Immigration Project, which represents the three Texas men, said the general public should be concerned that a federal court finds the government can detain people indefinitely without justification.
“We view this case as an affront to due process, as the 5th Circuit rejects due process,” Willis said. “This is truly a shocking extension of this attempt to criminalize immigrants and keep them in detention without any possibility of release, creating an environment of fear.”
Willis said his organization is still evaluating what legal steps to take and has not decided whether it plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
She said immigration lawyers are anticipating how district courts will react to the ruling. Many district judges have ruled that immigrants held in detention centers have the right to bond as long as they do not pose a flight risk or danger to the community.
Although Friday’s ruling is limited to the 5th Circuit, which includes Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, the Trump administration has transferred many immigrants from other states to detention centers in Texas.
A change in policy from the Trump administration
Under federal immigration laws, the government can quickly deport undocumented immigrants who recently crossed the U.S.-Mexico border without giving them the opportunity for a bond hearing. But for those who lived in the United States for months or years before being detained, the law gives them the right to challenge their detention.
In July 2025, the Trump administration announced a policy change, saying that anyone arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents – regardless of the length of their stay in the country – is not eligible for bail.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a separate but similar case that directly challenges the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy.
According to ProPublica, immigrants filed more petitions for habeas corpus — a legal procedure that allows a person in government custody to challenge their imprisonment — in the first 13 months of the second Trump administration than in the last three administrations combined.
Since January 2025, immigrants have filed more than 89,000 petitions against the Trump administration, demanding their release.
Friday’s ruling does not prohibit other detainees from filing habeas corpus petitions if they entered the country legally.
Politico found that more than 400 federal judges — appointed by presidents of both major political parties — have ruled in favor of immigrants’ rights to due process in more than 5,000 cases since the Trump administration’s policy change last year.
By comparison, 41 judges sided with the administration’s interpretation of the law in 250 cases, according to a Politico analysis of federal government data.
The Trump administration has appealed some cases to higher courts, leading to conflicting rulings.
