The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has issued a notable decision, determining that immigrants entering the United States illegally do not possess a constitutional right to a bond hearing to contest their detention. This ruling reverberates through legal circles, as it confronts the balance between immigration policy and constitutional rights. The Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision, delivered in a 10-7 majority, overturned its prior July 2026 panel ruling, which had mandated that the government could not constitutionally detain immigrants for more than 90 days without a habeas corpus hearing. Details from the ruling can be found here.
The panel’s July decision had previously challenged a policy from the Trump Administration allowing for indefinite detention, based on a reinterpretation of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. In contrast, Judge Cory Wilson, representing the majority in this latest decision, stated that detained immigrants could avoid physical detention simply by agreeing to leave the country.
Judge Leslie Southwick, dissenting, argued that the government should be required to justify detention, pointing to a fundamental right to freedom from physical restraint. Such arguments underscore the divide within the judiciary regarding immigration policy and due process.
This development occurs against the backdrop of the US Supreme Court’s agreement to review compulsory indefinite detention of immigrants without bond hearings. Notably, nine other US circuit courts have previously sided with immigrants on this issue, highlighting the Fifth Circuit’s divergent stance.
Immigrant advocates have voiced concerns, noting that according to a ProPublica investigation, the number of habeas cases filed by immigrants in the early months of the second Trump administration exceeds those in the previous three administrations combined. Conditions in detention centers, including inadequate food and hot water, have reportedly led some detainees to seek deportation.
Although the Fifth Circuit’s ruling is binding only in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, the strategic movement of detained immigrants to Texas by the Trump Administration amplifies its impact. The decision adds another layer to the ongoing national conversation on immigration enforcement and constitutional protections.