A divided federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration’s policy requiring broad mandatory detention of immigrants, marking the ninth appellate ruling against ICE on the issue and further advancing a dispute expected to reach the Supreme Court.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
A federal appeals court on Thursday rejected the Trump administration’s expanded immigration detention policy, adding another appellate ruling against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in a continuing legal dispute over whether certain immigrants can be held without an opportunity for release on bond.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled 2-1 against the government’s interpretation of federal immigration law, marking ICE’s ninth loss at the appellate level in litigation over the policy, according to Politico.
The accumulating appellate decisions have intensified the legal fight over the administration’s effort to expand mandatory detention as it carries out President Donald Trump’s broader immigration enforcement and deportation agenda.
Writing for the Fourth Circuit majority, Judge Barbara Keenan invoked the history of Japanese American internment during World War II while rejecting the government’s interpretation of a federal immigration statute enacted three decades ago.
“Those shameful and abhorrent past detentions were limited in scope in comparison to the mandatory detention that the Government urges us today to find that Congress established thirty years ago in an ambiguously worded statutory provision. We decline to do so,” Keenan wrote.
The ruling concerns the administration’s effort to subject a broader population of immigrants to mandatory detention rather than allowing them access to the procedures historically available to determine whether they can be released while their immigration cases proceed.
Thursday’s 2-1 decision represents the ninth time an appellate court has ruled against ICE’s position on the issue, according to Politico. The growing body of appellate litigation makes Supreme Court review increasingly likely as courts continue addressing the scope of federal immigration detention authority.
The dispute has emerged alongside the Trump administration’s effort to substantially increase immigration arrests, detention and removals.
Trump campaigned on carrying out mass deportations and, since returning to office, his administration has directed ICE to pursue that objective through a significantly expanded enforcement operation.
Available population data cited in reporting indicate that the foreign-born population in the United States, including people with and without legal immigration status, has declined by approximately 3 million during the administration’s enforcement campaign.
The administration nevertheless continues seeking the removal of millions of additional immigrants as it works to fulfill Trump’s campaign commitment to dramatically increase deportations.
The Fourth Circuit’s ruling does not end that broader enforcement effort. Instead, it places another judicial restriction on the government’s attempt to determine which immigrants can be held under mandatory detention provisions while their cases move through the immigration system.
At the center of the legal dispute is the administration’s interpretation of statutory language governing detention. The Fourth Circuit majority rejected the government’s argument that Congress intended the provision cited by the administration to establish the sweeping mandatory detention authority now asserted by ICE.
Keenan’s opinion emphasized both the wording of the statute and the scale of detention that would result from the government’s interpretation, comparing its potential reach with one of the most consequential episodes of mass detention in U.S. history.
The administration maintains that its expanded immigration enforcement policies are authorized under federal law and necessary to carry out the deportation program Trump promised voters.
Thursday’s decision leaves that interpretation facing another appellate rejection and moves the larger legal question closer to potential consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court.
With the Fourth Circuit becoming the latest appeals court to rule against the policy, the dispute over ICE’s mandatory detention authority is increasingly positioned for a nationwide resolution from the nation’s highest court.
Original article
Comments