Federal Agencies, Practice Resources

FAQs After Federal Court Requires Immigration Courts to Continue to Provide Bond Hearings, Despite Matter of M-S-

8/9/19 AILA Doc. No. 19070332. Asylum, Detention & Bond, Expedited Removal, Removal & Relief

The American Immigration Council, and its partners, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and the ACLU, issued FAQs after a district court judge issued a decision modifying an existing preliminary injunction in Padilla v. U.S., requiring immigration courts to provide bond hearings.

This update addresses the Ninth Circuit's July 22, 2019, decision declining to stay the portion of the preliminary injunction requiring bond hearings for class members, but staying the portion of the decision requiring bond hearings within seven days of a request and procedural protection for asylum seekers in bond hearings.

At this time, the immigration courts must provide bond hearings for class members, but need not implement the timeline and procedural protections mandated by the original injunction.

Download this Document

Cite as AILA Doc. No. 19070332.

Related Resources

Challenging Credible Fear Interview and Bond Hearing Delays (Padilla v. ICE, No. 2:18-cv-928 MJP (W.D. Wash. filed June 25, 2018))
AG Finds Individual Who Is Transferred from Expedited Removal to Full Removal Is Ineligible for Release on BondMatter of M-S-, 27 I&N Dec. 509 (A.G. 2019)