The United States Supreme Court is poised to revisit the issue of mandatory detention of migrants under the Constitution’s
due process clause. Next month, the court is set to hear arguments in the case of
Genalo v. G.M.. This case could have significant implications for the federal government’s power to detain migrants, focusing on whether long-term residents, including lawful permanent residents, are entitled to bond hearings while facing deportation.
The case involves a lawful permanent resident, G.M., who was convicted of assault in 2015. While ICE detained him five years later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit
ruled that detaining someone for an “unreasonably prolonged” period without a bond hearing violates the Fifth Amendment’s due process rights.
Historically, the court’s decisions have placed various limits on mandatory detention. The 2001 decision in
Zadvydas v. Davis limited indefinite detention for those who cannot be removed from the United States. However, the 2003 case
Demore v. Kim permitted mandatory detention during court proceedings, asserting that such detentions are typically brief. More recently, in
Jennings v. Rodriguez (2018), the court reaffirmed the power of ICE to detain migrants without oversight from immigration judges during pending legal proceedings.
The solicitor general argues that G.M.’s detention was lawful and that allowing bond hearings could undermine Congressional determinations about the risks associated with releasing certain criminal migrants. However, G.M.’s case may be rendered moot due to recent developments, including a pardon granted by New York Governor Kathy Hochul for G.M.’s assault conviction, making him no longer deportable under
immigration law.
Even if the Supreme Court dismisses the case, the fact that it was added to the calendar suggests that some justices are considering the constitutional limits of mandatory detention. The upcoming decision will likely reflect how the court views the balance between Congress’s authority in immigration matters and the due process rights of detainees. For further details, visit the full article on
SCOTUSblog.