The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up a closely watched immigration case that could determine whether non-citizens facing deportation can be held for extended periods without an opportunity to seek release on bail.
The dispute arises from a challenge to the federal government’s practice of detaining certain immigrants convicted of serious crimes while their removal proceedings remain pending. The administration has asked the nation’s highest court to overturn a lower court ruling that found excessively long detention without a bond hearing violates constitutional due process protections.
At the center of the case are two lawful permanent residents who were taken into immigration custody after criminal convictions. One, a Dominican Republic native identified in court records as G.M., became a green-card holder in 2011 and later pleaded guilty to assault in New York. He was detained in 2020 and remained in custody for nearly two years before being released amid concerns surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic.
The second individual, Jamaican citizen Carol Black, had lived in the United States as a lawful permanent resident since 1983. Immigration authorities detained him in 2019 based on a prior conviction involving the sexual abuse of a child. A federal court later ordered that he receive a bond hearing, after which he secured release on a $15,000 bond.
Federal law requires immigration authorities to detain non-citizens convicted of aggravated felonies and certain other serious offenses while pursuing deportation proceedings. The two men argued that their continued confinement without any opportunity to seek bail crossed constitutional boundaries and filed habeas corpus petitions challenging their detention.
Their cases eventually reached the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which concluded that the lengthy periods of detention—seven months in Black’s case and nearly two years in G.M.’s—were unreasonable without a hearing. The appellate court held that the Fifth Amendment’s due process guarantee entitled them to a bond hearing, though it declined to establish a fixed time limit for detention.
The appeals court further ruled that when detention becomes prolonged, the government should bear the burden of demonstrating, through clear and convincing evidence, that the individual poses either a flight risk or a danger to the community.
The administration contends that the lower court’s decision improperly limits Congress’s authority over immigration detention and has asked the Supreme Court to reverse it.
A separate issue may also arise during the proceedings. Black and his wife left the United States in 2025 after initially contesting his deportation order and have indicated they do not intend to return. His legal team has argued that this development renders his portion of the case moot.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments during its next term, beginning in October. The decision could have significant implications for immigration enforcement policies and the procedural rights available to detainees awaiting the outcome of deportation proceedings.
The case arrives amid a series of high-profile immigration disputes before the Supreme Court. The justices are also considering challenges involving deportation policies, temporary legal protections for certain immigrant groups, and the administration’s efforts to limit birthright citizenship.
