USA · updated 3h ago · 3 min read
Supreme Court Agrees To Review Trump Administration’s ICE Mandatory Detention Policy
Supreme Court will assess legality of Trump's policy detaining immigrants without bond hearings. Policy applies to millions of illegal entrants awaiting deportation proceedings.
Whether the issue is purely statutory or rights-based due process.
8 of 10 outlets skipped it: policy includes immigrants who lived in the US for years.
10outlets compared
Same story, two versions
tap a side to read it in full
The Hill
“However, the justices opted against taking up a broader legal question of whether Trump’s policy violates constitutional due process protections.”Read the original ↗
NBC News
“Try as it might, the government cannot twist the law to detain immigrants for months or even years on end without a bond hearing.”Read the original ↗
The Hill stresses the Court will decide only statutory legality, while NBC News highlights harshness and unlawfulness of indefinite detention.
Supreme Court to hear challenge
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review whether the Trump administration can detain tens of thousands of immigrants during their removal proceedings without access to bond hearings, in a case described as Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha.
The dispute centers on Ricardo Aparecido Barbosa da Cunha, a Brazilian citizen who came to the United States illegally more than 20 years ago and was taken into custody by ICE officers during a traffic stop in Massachusetts.
The Supreme Court’s review follows a federal judge in New York ordering a bond hearing within 10 days and ordering Barbosa da Cunha released on bond in late October 2025, after an immigration judge denied his request for a bond hearing.
The Supreme Court is set to consider the issue in its new term that begins Monday, as the case has divided federal appeals courts over whether the mandatory detention policy is lawful.
The Reuters account said the Supreme Court will hear the administration’s appeal of a ruling by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a case involving Barbosa da Cunha.
ACLU and government clash
Michael Tan, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union representing various detainees, said, "Try as it might, the government cannot twist the law to detain immigrants for months or even years on end without a bond hearing."
Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing the Trump administration, argued that the issue is a "critically important question of immigration law" and said the policy removes a "perverse incentive" whereby people who evade detention get treated more leniently than those detained at the border.
The Supreme Court will hear the Trump administration appeal in the case of Barbosa da Cunha, who was detained following a traffic stop in Norwood, Massachusetts, in September 2025.
The dispute involves whether immigrants who have been living in the U.S. have a right to a hearing to determine if they should remain detained while challenging their possible deportation.
The Hill reported that the administration argues it can detain people without bond if they are found to be in the country unlawfully, even if they have been living on U.S. soil for years.T
What is at stake
The Reuters account said the mandatory detention policy is part of President Trump’s broader crackdown on immigration and that the guidance issued by the Department of Homeland Security in July 2025 announced immigrants in the United States illegally are subject to mandatory detention without a bond hearing. The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling could affect thousands of cases challenging mandatory detentions, after a Reuters analysis found hundreds of judges had ruled more than 4,400 times that the administration had detained such immigrants unlawfully. The Supreme Court’s upcoming term will be when the dispute is set to be heard, and the Supreme Court opted against taking up a broader legal question of whether Trump’s policy violates constitutional due process protections.
The New York Times said the policy is a departure from past practice, when such migrants were generally allowed an opportunity to seek release after a hearing before a judge. Lower courts have rejected the policy more than 20,000 times and the Supreme Court will decide whether ICE’s unprecedented mandatory detention policy is legal.