Politics · United States · 1 hr ago
Fifth Circuit Upholds Trump Policy of Detaining Migrants Without Bond Hearings
The full Fifth Circuit upheld the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy in a split decision involving three migrant men.
The majority said their constitutional rights did not entitle them to bond hearings because they had not been admitted to the United States.
Last year, the administration began treating some long-term residents as people seeking admission, a classification that denies them bond hearings under the policy.
The ruling affects a system holding thousands of immigrants in Fifth Circuit states, especially Texas and Louisiana, and supports a key part of the administration’s mass-deportation efforts.
Most federal appeals courts have rejected the policy, making the Fifth Circuit an outlier.
The Supreme Court has agreed to consider a separate statutory challenge to whether the policy correctly interprets immigration law.
The full Fifth Circuit ruled that three detained migrant men have no constitutional right to bond hearings.
The split decision upheld the Trump administration’s policy of mandatory detention for noncitizens who have not been admitted to the United States.
The majority said immigration statutes set the procedures available to the men, despite their Fifth Amendment rights.
Seven judges dissented, arguing that the ruling left long-term residents without constitutional protection.
The Supreme Court has agreed to consider a separate statutory question about the mandatory detention scheme.
- Who
- The full Fifth Circuit and three migrant men who challenged their detention.
- What
- The court upheld mandatory detention without bond hearings, ruling that the men had no constitutional right to such hearings.
- When
- Friday, October 23, 2026.
- Where
- The US Fifth Circuit, which covers states including Texas and Louisiana.
- Why
- The majority said the men had not been admitted to the United States and were not entitled to procedures beyond those set out in immigration statutes.
The Fifth Circuit majority
The seven dissenting judges
Constitutional rights
The Fifth Circuit majority
The men had Fifth Amendment rights but were not entitled to bond hearings because they had not been admitted to the United States.
The seven dissenting judges
The ruling built an “impenetrable wall” between the Constitution and long-term residents.
Authority over immigration
The Fifth Circuit majority
Congress, not courts, has broad authority to set immigration policy and procedures.
The seven dissenting judges
The majority’s approach was challenged by dissenting judges, including over its account of constitutional protections and history.
The Trump administration began classifying some noncitizens who had long lived in the United States as “seeking admission,” denying them bond hearings.
The full Fifth Circuit upheld the policy in a split decision.
The Supreme Court agreed to consider whether the mandatory detention scheme correctly interprets the statute.
- Judges in majority
- Eight joined Judge Cory Wilson’s opinion; Judge Priscilla Richman concurred with its result.
- Dissenters
- Seven judges dissented.
- States affected
- Texas and Louisiana are among the Fifth Circuit states with thousands of detained immigrants.
- Other appellate circuits
- One other circuit has upheld the policy; nine have ruled against it.
3 sources
What people are saying
Congress entrusts broad authority to delineate immigration policy, and to design proceedings to effectuate those policy choices, to Congress — not courts
an impenetrable wall between the Constitution and these long-term residents
At a time when conditions in immigration detention are increasingly dangerous, this ruling opens the door to more people being locked up for no reason, with devastating consequences for them, their loved ones, and their community
These habeas petitions, far from affirming American liberty, are profoundly un-American — because they send the message that the only people who are above the law in our country are the ones who violated our laws to get in