ICE mandatory detention policy is unlawful, federal appeals court in Philly rules

From Delco to Chesco and Montco to Bucks, what about life in Philly’s suburbs do you want WHYY News to cover? Let us know!

A federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled Friday that a Trump administration policy mandating detention of nearly all undocumented immigrants violates the Fifth Amendment and federal immigration law.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy enacted in July 2025 calls for most undocumented immigrants to be detained and held without a bond hearing, even if they have been in the country for years and are pursuing legal status through official channels.

The policy is a drastic shift in decades of government practice, with ICE arguing that a federal immigration statute that mandates detention for people seeking admission to the U.S. at the border also applies to noncitizens who have been living within the country.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit joined seven other federal appeals courts Friday in rejecting that policy, ruling 2-1 that the practice violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause as well as federal immigration law. Two other federal appeals courts have ruled in favor of the directive.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The policy represents a key strategy in the administration’s mass deportation campaign and has played a role in the surge in immigration arrests across the region since President Donald Trump took office again in January 2025.

In response, immigration attorneys have flooded federal courts with habeas corpus petitions, arguing that their clients’ detention is a violation of their constitutional rights. Federal judges across the country have overwhelmingly ruled in their favor.

“Even before the Trump administration began its campaign to detain every person it could round up, immigration detention was a cruel and unnecessary practice,” said Vanessa Stine, senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, in a statement. “But denying bond hearings to the individuals ICE detains is an alarming trend that is blatantly at odds with the plain text of the statute and the Constitution’s guarantee of due process.”

The 3rd Circuit Court’s ruling “represents a milestone in the battle against arbitrary and unlawful detention policies that have been put forth by this administration,” said Mana Aliabadi, an associate attorney at Palladino, Isbell & Casazza, LLC, part of the legal team representing the immigrants who challenged their detention.

The policy has been “part and parcel of the administration’s course to lock people up first and then ask questions later,” she said.

Being detained makes it more difficult for immigrants with pending applications for legal status to work with their attorneys to prepare their cases, as ICE often transfers detainees to other states across the country, Aliabadi said. Their cases are also then sent to detained immigration courts for expedited proceedings.

“Ultimately, the case says that people have a fundamental right to due process and freedom from restrictions on their liberty, whether or not they’re noncitizens in this country,” she said. “So every person deserves an individualized hearing or determination before that liberty or freedom is deprived of them.”

The Justice Department and the ACLU have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue in its next term.

Editor’s note: This article has been edited to include comment from Mana Aliabadi, one of the attorneys representing the immigrants who challenged their detention.