Supreme Court to Review ICE Detention Without Bond Hearings for 21 Months
Updated
Updated · Slate · Jun 17
Supreme Court to Review ICE Detention Without Bond Hearings for 21 Months
3 articles · Updated · Slate · Jun 17
Summary
The justices said they will hear next term whether ICE can hold lawful permanent residents for months or years without any bond hearing while deportation cases proceed.
The case centers on two green-card holders: Carol Black was detained for 7 months in 2019, and Keisy G.M. for 21 months, before lower-court relief ended their confinement.
The 2nd Circuit ruled both men were entitled to due-process bond hearings, applying the Mathews balancing test to civil immigration detention rather than guaranteeing release.
The Justice Department is asking the court to go further and hold that lawful permanent residents have no constitutional right to bond hearings at all, regardless of detention length.
The court also added mootness to the questions presented because both men have been released, but the ruling could still reshape due-process protections for future immigration detainees.
If the court rules against bond hearings, could green-card holders be detained for years over past crimes?
Could a ruling on immigrant detention weaken due process rights for all individuals in civil cases?
Supreme Court to Decide Fate of 21-Month Detention Without Bond for Green Card Holders: Genalo v. Black and the Future of Due Process in U.S. Immigration Law
Overview
The U.S. Supreme Court has announced it will hear Genalo v. Black, a case that could reshape immigration law and due process protections for lawful permanent residents. The Court will decide if the government can detain green card holders with criminal convictions for long periods—sometimes over 21 months—without a bond hearing. While a 2018 Supreme Court decision, Jennings v. Rodriguez, addressed statutory issues, it left open the broader constitutional question. Now, Genalo v. Black gives the Court a chance to directly address whether such prolonged detention without judicial review violates the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause.