Divided panel deepens nationwide circuit split and sets up another potential Supreme Court immigration showdown.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, known for its liberal leanings, dealt a significant blow to the Trump administration on Thursday. In a 2–1 decision, the court ruled that illegal immigrants apprehended within the United States cannot be subjected to mandatory detention without a bond hearing while they contest deportation.
In the case of Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, the court’s divided panel upheld a lower court’s decision favoring a group of illegal immigrants held at the Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma, Washington.
The majority opinion, delivered by Trump appointee Judge Daniel Bress and supported by Clinton appointee Judge Margaret McKeown, concluded that immigrants present without legal admission and detained inside the country should be governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which allows bond hearings, rather than the mandatory detention conditions under § 1225(b)(2)(A).
The court argued that Congress did not intend for the stringent no-bond regulations from 1996 to apply to those who managed to enter the country undetected and become part of American communities over time.
Dissenting, Judge Carlos Bea contended that the law categorizes those who entered without inspection as “applicants for admission” seeking entry, thus necessitating mandatory detention.
Bea highlighted the illogical nature of requiring detention for those caught at the border while permitting those who evade detection and reside illegally in the U.S. to be released on bond, potentially absconding. Read the Ninth Circuit’s 99-page opinion here.
The Ninth Circuit’s ruling applies to courts in California, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, and other states within the circuit, regions historically attractive to illegal immigration and sanctuary policies. This decision is expected to lead to more habeas petitions, more releases, and greater chances for illegal immigrants to vanish while their legal proceedings continue for years.
The ruling means immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally but are later arrested inside the country generally cannot automatically be held without bond in the Ninth Circuit. pic.twitter.com/AzHpAptHuV
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) July 30, 2026
This marks the fifth time a federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration’s interpretation of immigration law.
While the Fifth and Eighth Circuits have supported the government’s stance that illegal entrants should not evade consequences simply for crossing the border, the Second, Sixth, Tenth, Eleventh, and now Ninth Circuits have diverged in their rulings.
Ad block users: Some site features may not work correctly while an ad blocker is enabled, because they break scripts and content this website depends on. If you can’t see comments below, for example, please disable your ad blocker.
