The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to step in and resolve a split among lower courts over whether illegal immigrants who have been convicted of crimes can be held without bond throughout removal proceedings, or whether they must receive a bond hearing when detention becomes prolonged.
Petition filed amid a national split
Solicitor General John Sauer filed the petition on Monday, requesting that the Court take up Genalo v. D.C. The case revives a constitutional dispute the Court was set to consider earlier this term in Genalo v. Black, which became moot after New York Governor Kathy Hochul pardoned the defendant.
The defendant, a Dominican national named D.C., has a criminal record that includes drug trafficking and domestic‑violence offenses and has been removed from the United States six times, according to ICE. Federal law requires certain illegal immigrants with criminal convictions to remain in custody while their removal cases proceed. However, the Second Circuit has ruled that if detention drags on, the government must provide a bond hearing to justify continued custody.
Why the administration wants a uniform rule
“The rights of these criminal aliens who are being detained, whether or not they’re entitled to a bond hearing, currently depend on which jurisdiction they happen to fall in,” said Michael Morley, a law professor at Florida State University. “The government is asking the Supreme Court to set one uniform interpretation for the entire country.”
The administration argues that the Constitution does not require a bond hearing in every case and that the burden of proof should fall on the detainee seeking release, not on the government to prove a flight risk or danger to the community. This approach, the administration says, would prevent detainees from exploiting lengthy proceedings to obtain bond and then abscond.
Concerns about abuse of the system
Chad Mizelle, chair of litigation at the America First Policy Institute and former acting associate attorney general, warned that some illegal immigrants use “game‑manship” to delay their cases. “They’ll file multiple asylum applications, switch attorneys, ask for continuances, and stretch detention to six, seven, eight months—completely of their own making,” he said. “If prolonged detention eventually gives them the right to seek bond, it creates an incentive to stretch proceedings.”
Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, described the additional litigation as a “foot‑dragging, sand‑in‑the‑gears” effort that would stall the administration’s deportation agenda.
Supreme Court’s prior stance
The Court has previously upheld mandatory detention during removal proceedings, but it has left the specific constitutional question of bond‑hearing obligations open for future adjudication. Morley noted that the Court “went out of its way to leave this question open for a future case.” The administration’s petition asks the justices to resolve the split now, rather than wait for another appellate decision.
“You wanted to resolve this case. Here’s another case that presents the same exact question and lets you resolve the circuit split this term,” Morley said. “So basically, substitute this case for the moot case.”
Administration’s broader immigration enforcement goals
By securing a clear, nationwide rule, the Trump administration hopes to strengthen immigration enforcement, protect communities from repeat offenders, and ensure that the federal government, not individual detainees, bears the burden of proof when seeking release. The administration believes this will streamline removal proceedings and reduce opportunities for abuse of the system.
Fox News Digital reached out to the Justice Department for comment.
Original reporting: Fox News (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
