A federal appeals court has upheld a key Trump administration immigration policy, allowing federal authorities to detain certain individuals facing deportation without bond hearings.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the ruling in a 2-1 decision on Wednesday, marking the second appellate-level victory for the administration on this issue in recent weeks.
The court concluded that federal law permits—and in some cases requires—Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain individuals classified as “applicants for admission” while removal proceedings are ongoing.
The ruling applies to people who have lived in the United States for years without lawful status, expanding the scope of previous interpretations that often allowed release through bond hearings.
The decision is expected to have a significant effect in Minnesota, where federal district courts previously rejected this approach.
Hundreds of individuals detained during recent ICE operations in the Twin Cities had filed petitions challenging their detention.
Many district judges had ruled in favor of bond hearings, but the 8th Circuit ruling now binds lower courts in the region, according to Politico.
Judge Bobby Shepherd authored the majority opinion, joined by Judge L. Steven Grasz.
The court determined that individuals present in the United States without lawful admission meet the statutory definition of “applicants for admission” under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) and are subject to detention without bond while proceedings continue.
The ruling aligns with a similar 2-1 decision from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the same interpretation in Texas.
Together, these rulings strengthen the administration’s legal position as comparable cases proceed through the 7th and 9th Circuits, where judges have expressed skepticism toward the policy.
Attorney General Pam Bondi praised the outcome as a “massive court victory against activist judges” and emphasized that the administration intends to fully enforce federal law.
The legal dispute centers on a decades-old statute requiring detention of individuals deemed to be seeking admission to the United States.
Previously, administrations of both parties primarily applied the law to recent border crossers.
In 2025, ICE reinterpreted the statute to extend to individuals already inside the country without lawful entry, a position later supported by the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Supporters of the ruling say it restores the plain meaning of the law and allows ICE to carry out detentions without requiring bond hearings for many cases.
According to The Gateway Pundit, the decision also reverses prior lower court rulings, including one involving a Mexican national detained in Minneapolis who sought release without bond during removal proceedings.
Opponents, including several federal judges and immigrant advocacy groups, have raised constitutional concerns regarding due process.
While the 5th and 8th Circuits upheld the statutory interpretation, neither addressed whether detainees are entitled to bond hearings under the U.S. Constitution.
Some district courts have continued releasing individuals on due process grounds.
Judge Ralph Erickson, dissenting, noted that multiple presidential administrations previously interpreted the law more narrowly and warned that the broader approach could have far-reaching consequences.
“Five presidential administrations… interpreted [the law] to apply only to those arriving at the border,” he wrote.
As legal challenges continue, the issue may move through additional appellate courts, potentially resulting in a nationwide ruling.
The outcome could affect how federal authorities handle detention for millions of individuals currently living in the United States without lawful status.
