The full court rules that long residence and community ties do not give three immigrants who were never formally admitted a constitutional right to seek release on bond.
The full US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that three detained immigrants who were never formally admitted to the United States have no constitutional right to bond hearings while awaiting deportation, Fox News said. A bond hearing gives a detainee a chance to seek release while removal proceedings continue.
The ruling follows an existing disagreement among federal appeals courts over which immigration detention law applies to people who entered unlawfully, were never formally admitted and were arrested after years inside the country. The Fifth Circuit had already adopted the interpretation requiring detention without an ordinary bond hearing.
In the Rodriguez case, the court addressed a separate question: whether the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause nevertheless requires a hearing. It held that the three men’s years or decades of residence, and their ties to the country and their communities, do not establish that constitutional right. The decision applies within the Fifth Circuit, not across every federal appeals circuit.
The underlying legal dispute concerns two sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The reported split is nine appeals courts to two:
| Courts | Law applied | Effect during removal proceedings |
|---|---|---|
| Fifth and Eighth Circuits |
The first National Security Strategy in two decades commits to deeper European cooperation as Canada and the European Union discuss closer ties.
2 min
| Section 1225 |
| Treats these immigrants as “applicants for admission,” requiring detention without an ordinary bond hearing. |
| Nine other federal appeals courts | Section 1226 | Provides a path to seek release on bond. |
The Supreme Court will consider that statutory question in Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, a case from the Second Circuit. The question is whether the mandatory-detention provision applies to longtime immigrants arrested inside the country—not whether the Constitution independently requires a bond hearing.
If the Supreme Court decides that the law instead provides a route to bond hearings, affected detainees could seek release without needing to establish a constitutional right to a hearing. In a dissent, Judge Leslie Southwick said the constitutional ruling would have far less significance if the Supreme Court rejected the Fifth Circuit’s interpretation of the statute.
The Supreme Court agreed earlier in October to hear Rhoney during its current term. As of October 25, it had not scheduled oral arguments.
Ukraine’s ombudsman plans food and medical aid for about 2,000 people in the Russian-occupied city on October 30, with mine clearance still under way.
3 min
The change applies across pension schemes from 28 October 2026. Where the member died before 75 and had enough remaining allowance, delays beyond two years no longer make lump sums taxable.
4 min
