99842cf0-a74f-534f-9a0a-c6aa7b0bb8c2, fnc, Fox News, fox-news/us/immigration/deportation, fox-news/person/pam-bondi, fox-news/us/immigration, fox-news/politics/federal-judges, fox-news/us/immigration/illegal-immigrants, fox-news/politics, article
Illegal immigrants nabbed by ICE do not have to face bond hearings, a step that has become a potential legal impediment to President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda, a second federal court found Tuesday.
The case involved Mexican national Joaquin Herrera Avila, who was captured in Minneapolis in August and failed to produce legal credentials authorizing his admission to the U.S., and therefore was detained without bond and faced removal proceedings.
“Massive court victory against activist judges and for President Trump’s law and order agenda,” Bondi said after the St. Louis-based Eighth Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling and deemed many captured illegal immigrants ineligible for such chances to be released.
TOP US COURT HANDS TRUMP A WIN ON DEPORTATIONS AS SCOTUS CHALLENGE LOOMS
A district court in Minnesota granted Avila’s petition for habeas corpus, or to challenge the legality of his detention, which the Trump administration challenged.
“We reverse and remand [that ruling] for proceedings consistent with this opinion,” the Eighth Circuit ruled Wednesday in a split decision, with George W. Bush-appointed Judge Bobby Shepherd of Arkansas writing for the majority.
Shepherd wrote that the district court relied on federal law allowing detention-without-bond for “an alien who is an applicant for admission [or] seeking admission…” while considering Avila to be no longer seeking formal admission because he had resided and worked in the U.S. for many years. But, Avila did not seek further residency status such as naturalization or asylum, according to the court, which ruled that aspect proved he was not “seeking admission” in a legal sense.
“The Eighth Circuit has held that illegal aliens can be detained without bond — following a similar ruling from the Fifth Circuit last month. The law is very clear, but Democrats and activist judges haven’t wanted to enforce it. This administration will,” Bondi said.
“Imagine how many illegal alien crimes could have been averted if the left had simply followed the law?”
BORDER PATROL CHIEF BOVINO SAYS CHICAGO EFFORTS ‘VINDICATED’ AFTER COURT REVERSES ORDER RESTRICTING OPERATIONS
The Eighth Circuit’s ruling concurs with a related ruling from the New Orleans-based Fifth Circuit which found that noncitizens can be held without bond, according to Bloomberg Law.
“If Congress wanted to make clear that ‘seeking admission’ was an independent requirement in the statute, it could have easily done so,” the court added.
Right-wing commentator Gunther Eagleman tweeted that the decision was indeed a win against “activist judges.”
“The Eighth Circuit just overturned an activist judge and upheld ICE’s mass detention policy in a 2-1 ruling,” he said, as a Trump appointee joined Shepherd in concurrence and another dissented.
FEDERAL JUDGE REJECTS MINNESOTA REQUEST TO BLOCK ICE-LED OPERATION METRO SURGE
“Key decision: Illegal aliens already inside the U.S. can be detained without bond during removal proceedings. This is a massive victory for the deportation mission. Leftist judges can no longer force DHS to simply release invaders into our communities to commit more crimes. Huge L for open borders,” Eagleman said.
In his dissent, Trump-appointed Judge Ralph R. Erickson of Minnesota said that with the exception of a single DUI conviction, Avila had lived as a law-abiding resident for just under 20 years.
“On August 29, 2025, he was stopped by deportation officers while driving on Cedar Avenue in Minneapolis, Minnesota. For the past 29 years, Avila would have been entitled to a bond hearing during his removal proceedings,” Erickson wrote, noting that the court’s ruling means that Avila and millions of others are now “subject to mandatory detention” under federal law.
“In doing so, the court does not rely on recent congressional action or a change in the regulations governing detention but rather engages in a novel interpretation of ‘alien seeking admission’ that eluded the courts and five previous presidential administrations,” he said.
“Because the court’s interpretation is not supported by the plain meaning of ‘seeking,’ the context of the INA, or the history of the IIRIRA (an immigration reform law signed by Bill Clinton), I respectfully dissent.”
Fox News Digital did not encounter any immediate negative responses from pundits or politicians within a few minutes of its release.
Latest & Breaking News on Fox News
About the Author
