US federal court upholds Trump detention with no bond policy - JURIST - News

## Summary
News United States Government , Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons A US federal appellate court on Wednesday upheld the Trump administration’s practice of detaining undocumented immigrants without bond, reversing a lower court decision amid increasingly overcrowded detention centers and administrative courtrooms. The decision aligns with a US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruling in February, which also upheld the denial of a bond hearing for immigrants detained in the US. In August 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) arrested Mexican citizen Joaquin Herrera Avila in Minneapolis for lacking proper documentation to enter the US, detained him without bond, and placed him into removal proceedings. On appeal, the federal court disagreed with the district court’s reading of the statute, finding that even those already present within the US, who entered without lawful admission, may be subject to mandatory detention.

## Article Content
News
United States Government
, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
A US federal appellate court on Wednesday
upheld
the Trump administration’s practice of detaining undocumented immigrants without bond,
reversing
a lower court decision amid increasingly overcrowded detention centers and administrative courtrooms.
The decision aligns with a US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
ruling
in February, which also upheld the denial of a bond hearing for immigrants detained in the US.
In August 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) arrested Mexican citizen Joaquin Herrera Avila in Minneapolis for lacking proper documentation to enter the US, detained him without bond, and placed him into removal proceedings. In October, a federal district court
granted
Herrera Avila’s habeas corpus petition seeking release, and DHS subsequently appealed.
In granting Herrera Avila’s petition, the district court reasoned that
8 U.S.C. § 1225
, part of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
, did not apply to Herrera Avila because he had been physically present in the US for years. The court interpreted the
mandatory detention
provisions of statute to only apply to “applicants for admission,” as mere presence does not suffice for mandatory detention.
On appeal, the federal court disagreed with the district court’s reading of the statute, finding that even those already present within the US, who entered without lawful admission, may be subject to mandatory detention.
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of the administration’s
mass detention
policy. The ruling will be binding within the seven states comprising the circuit, including Minnesota, where hundreds of lawsuits were filed on behalf of individuals who alleged they were wrongly detained in
Operation Metro Surge
.
Attorney General Pamela Bondi praised the court’s decision in an
X post
, writing:
MASSIVE COURT VICTORY against activist judges and for President Trump’s law and order agenda! The Eighth Circuit has held that illegal aliens can be detained without bond — following a similar ruling from the Fifth Circuit last month. The law is very clear, but Democrats and activist judges haven’t wanted to enforce it. This administration WILL.
American Civil Liberties ⁠Union attorney  and counsel for Herrera Avila, Michael Tan, said he and his team will assess appropriate next steps in the case.

---

## Expert Analysis

### Merits
N/A

### Areas for Consideration
- In August 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) arrested Mexican citizen Joaquin Herrera Avila in Minneapolis for lacking proper documentation to enter the US, detained him without bond, and placed him into removal proceedings.

### Implications
- In granting Herrera Avila’s petition, the district court reasoned that 8 U.S.C. § 1225 , part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 , did not apply to Herrera Avila because he had been physically present in the US for years.
- On appeal, the federal court disagreed with the district court’s reading of the statute, finding that even those already present within the US, who entered without lawful admission, may be subject to mandatory detention.
- The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of the administration’s mass detention policy.
- The ruling will be binding within the seven states comprising the circuit, including Minnesota, where hundreds of lawsuits were filed on behalf of individuals who alleged they were wrongly detained in Operation Metro Surge .

### Expert Commentary
This article covers court, detention, circuit topics. Areas of concern are also raised. Readability: Flesch-Kincaid grade 0.0. Word count: 378.