BIA Vacates Bond Based on Undisclosed Prior Asylum Grant Obtained Under a Different Identity

The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from a $12,000 bond grant, holding that the respondent failed to meet his burden of showing he is not a flight risk. The Board found it highly significant that the respondent had omitted from his asylum application the fact that he had passed through Greece and previously obtained asylum there under a different identity, noting that the omission implicated his credibility, his true identity, potential statutory bars to relief, and his willingness to commit immigration fraud.

The Board also noted that the Immigration Judge had already denied the respondent's asylum application, and that the fraud revelations made his prospects on appeal "remote." While acknowledging favorable factors such as steady employment, a fixed address, and the absence of a criminal record, the Board concluded these could not overcome serious doubts about his trustworthiness and likelihood of complying with a removal order and vacated the bond.

The full text of Matter of Y-M-B- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1463051/dl?inline

BIA Orders Detention Without Bond Based on Pattern of DUI Arrests and a Domestic Assault Charge

The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from an Immigration Judge's grant of bond, holding that the respondent failed to carry his burden under INA § 236(a) of showing he is not a danger to persons or property. The Board gave "substantial weight" to the respondent's pattern of alcohol-related driving arrests in 2021 and 2022, along with a more recent May 2026 arrest for domestic assault, and reiterated under Matter of Siniauskas that driving under the influence is a significant adverse consideration in custody determinations.

The Board acknowledged the respondent's family and community ties but held that, consistent with Matter of Adeniji, such equities generally do not mitigate a finding of dangerousness once a pattern of serious criminal conduct has been established. It vacated the Immigration Judge's bond decision and ordered the respondent detained without bond.

The full text of Matter of Roberto Morales Cuxun can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1463806/dl?inline

Second Circuit Denies Rehearing En Banc, Reaffirms Section 1226 Governs Bond Eligibility for Long-Present Noncitizens

The Second Circuit has denied rehearing en banc in a habeas case challenging the bondless detention of a noncitizen who entered the United States unlawfully more than two decades ago, leaving in place the panel's holding that 8 U.S.C. § 1226, not § 1225, governs his detention and entitles him to a bond hearing. The order drew a concurrence and a dissent from denial, underscoring the live circuit split over this question.  The panel majority had held that § 1225(b)(2)(A)'s mandatory, bondless detention provision applies only to noncitizens actively "seeking admission" at the border, and that someone who has already entered the country unlawfully and remained for years is not seeking admission in that sense, so he falls instead under § 1226(a)'s discretionary detention scheme.

The full text of Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden can be found here: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/OPN/25-3141_complete%20en%20banc_opn.pdf

BIA Holds Street Racing and Resisting Arrest Established Danger to the Community in Bond Proceedings

The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from a $15,000 bond grant to a Kyrgyz respondent, holding that his recent arrests for driving on a license suspended for street racing, resisting arrest, and possessing contraband in jail demonstrated he had not met his burden of proving he is not a danger to the community.

The Board held that the immigration judge's finding that the respondent would not reoffend because he had "a lot to lose" was speculative and contradicted by his own recent conduct, and that a state court's decision to release him on his own recognizance did not bind the immigration judge's separate dangerousness assessment. Because a finding of dangerousness alone is dispositive of bond eligibility, the Board ordered the respondent detained without bond without reaching the question of flight risk.

The full text of Matter of Kamalov can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1460501/dl?inline

BIA Holds Immigration Judges Lack Jurisdiction to Redetermine Bond After a Final Removal Order

The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from an immigration judge's order releasing a respondent on a $1,500 bond after she had already been granted CAT protection and become subject to an administratively final removal order, holding that immigration judges generally lack jurisdiction to conduct custody redeterminations once a removal order becomes final.

The Board held that post-removal-period detention is governed exclusively by DHS's own regulatory custody-review process and, per the Supreme Court's decisions in Zadvydas v. Davis and Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, does not entitle a detained noncitizen to a bond hearing before an immigration judge, with the sole exception of DHS's own referral of special-circumstances cases. The Board vacated the bond order, noting that the respondent's proper avenues for relief are a custody review request to DHS or a habeas corpus petition in federal district court.

The full text of Matter of W-F-D- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1459006/dl?inline

First Circuit Holds Unadmitted Noncitizens Present in the Interior Are Not "Seeking Admission"

The First Circuit has affirmed a district court order requiring bond hearings for a certified class of noncitizens detained in Massachusetts after entering the United States without inspection, holding that such individuals are governed by the discretionary detention authority in 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) rather than the mandatory, bondless detention provision in § 1225(b)(2)(A).

The Court held that "seeking admission" in § 1225(b)(2)(A) means seeking lawful entry, and that a noncitizen who has already entered the country unlawfully years earlier is not seeking such entry, regardless of being deemed an "applicant for admission" under the statute's separate deeming provision. Joining six other circuits and deepening a split with the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, the Court rejected the government's argument that the deeming provision extends to "seeking admission" as well, and found further support in the statutory redundancies the government's reading would create with § 1226(c)'s recently expanded mandatory-detention provisions.

The full text of Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz can be found here: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/opnfiles/25-2152P-01A.pdf

BIA Vacates Bond Grant Based on Speculative Eligibility for Future Relief

The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from a $7,500 bond grant to a Mexican respondent who overstayed a visitor visa, holding that the immigration judge improperly relied on speculative eligibility for asylum, cancellation of removal, and adjustment of status to offset flight risk.

The Board held that flight risk encompasses not just whether a respondent will appear at hearings but whether he will comply with an eventual removal order, and that an alien's incentive to prolong proceedings by filing for relief does not itself show he will comply with an adverse final order. Because the immigration judge's findings that the respondent was merely "potentially" eligible for relief were unsupported by the record, the Board vacated the bond grant and remanded for further fact-finding.

The full text of Matter of A-L-S- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1454391/dl?inline

BIA Holds Flight Risk Includes Likelihood of Success in Defending Against Removal

The Board of Immigration Appeals has dismissed a respondent's appeal from denial of bond, upholding the immigration judge's determination that he posed a flight risk that no bond amount could mitigate given evidence of inconsistent statements to USCIS and possible involvement in human rights violations in Afghanistan.

The Board held that a USCIS denial of an adjustment application was properly admitted as probative of flight risk despite hearsay objections, since immigration proceedings apply only a fundamental-fairness standard to evidence, and that potentially serious adverse evidence bearing on the respondent's prospects for relief may outweigh favorable equities like lengthy residence and family ties in assessing bond.

The full text of Matter of A-W-M-K- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1455176/dl?inline

Ninth Circuit Holds Unadmitted Aliens in the Interior Are Not Subject to Mandatory Border Detention

The Ninth Circuit has affirmed summary judgment for a certified class of detained noncitizens in Western Washington, holding that unadmitted aliens apprehended in the interior of the United States are not subject to mandatory, bondless detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) and instead remain eligible for discretionary release on bond under § 1226(a).

The Court held that the traditional, thirty-year understanding of § 1225(b)(2)(A) as limited to aliens seeking entry at the border finds greater support in the statute's text, structure, and history than the government's 2025 reinterpretation, which would render the phrase "seeking admission" superfluous and sits in tension with the Court's own precedent in Torres v. Barr. The Court joined the Second, Sixth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits in rejecting the government's position, deepening a circuit split with the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, over a dissent that would have deferred to the government's textual reading.

The full text of Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/07/30/25-6842.pdf

BIA Holds Bond Venue Follows Detainee's Location, Not Where Removal Case Is Pending

The Board of Immigration Appeals has sustained DHS's appeal from an immigration judge's decision releasing a respondent on an $8,000 bond, after the respondent had already been transferred from Massachusetts to a detention facility in Texas before the bond hearing took place. The immigration judge in Massachusetts reasoned that venue for the bond request remained proper there because the respondent's removal case was still administratively pending in that court.

The Board held that bond proceedings are separate from removal proceedings, and that the controlling regulation ties bond venue to the respondent's place of detention, not to which immigration court is handling the underlying removal case. Because the respondent had already been transferred to Texas by the time he filed his second custody redetermination request, the Massachusetts immigration court was not the proper venue, and the Board vacated the bond decision without reaching the merits of dangerousness or flight risk.

The full text of Matter of Vizcaino Aybar can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1450581/dl?inline

Tenth Circuit Holds Interior Detention Under Section 1225 Limited to the Border, Requires Bond Eligibility

The Tenth Circuit has reversed the denial of habeas relief for a long-term Oklahoma resident detained for over eight months without a bond hearing after the government reinterpreted 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) to apply to unadmitted noncitizens arrested anywhere in the country, departing from nearly thirty years of contrary practice. The petitioner, married to a lawful permanent resident and stepfather to a U.S. citizen, has no criminal history apart from a single DUI.

Joining the Second, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits and splitting from the Fifth and Eighth, the Court held that the statutory phrase "seeking admission" independently limits § 1225(b)(2)(A) to noncitizens at the border, since a person who has already entered the country can no longer be said to have an ongoing, present request for admission pending. The Court also found that reading § 1225(b)(2)(A) to reach the interior would render portions of § 1226(c) superfluous and would raise serious constitutional concerns under the doctrine of constitutional avoidance. The petitioner remains detainable under § 1226(a), which requires a bond hearing.

The full text of Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin can be found here: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111461009.pdf

Fifth Circuit Affirms Habeas Relief for Long-Term Residents Held Without Bond Under Section 1225

The Fifth Circuit has affirmed habeas relief for three long-term undocumented residents of Texas, each detained without a bond hearing after the government reinterpreted 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) to mandate detention for unadmitted noncitizens found anywhere in the country's interior, not just at the border. None of the three men had a criminal history or removal order, and each has U.S. citizen children.

The Court held that even under this new statutory interpretation, the Due Process Clause requires the government to provide a bond hearing within ninety days of detention, since Congress made no individualized or categorical findings that noncitizens like the petitioners pose a danger or flight risk sufficient to justify mandatory, bondless detention.

The full text of Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega can be found here: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/26/26-50219-CV0.pdf

Eight days later, the Fifth Circuit granted en banc rehearing in the matter, vacating the three-judge panel’s decision: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/26/26-50219-CV1.pdf

BIA Finds Prior UAC Designation and Approved SIJ Petition Do Not Create Bond Jurisdiction

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that neither a prior unaccompanied-child designation nor an approved SIJ petition gives an Immigration Judge authority to redetermine custody for a respondent who has not been admitted to the United States. The respondent had entered as a minor, later aged out of UAC status, and had an approved Form I-360 SIJ petition.

The Board followed Matter of Yajure Hurtado and held that the respondent remained an applicant for admission subject to INA 235(b)(2)(A), rather than INA 236(a). Because section 235(b)(2)(A) does not provide for Immigration Judge bond redetermination, the Board sustained DHS’s appeal, vacated the bond order, and ordered the respondent detained without bond.

The full text of Matter of N-A-G-C- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1443566/dl?inline

BIA Vacates Bond Where Respondent Did Not Show He Was Not a Danger

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a respondent’s false imprisonment conviction and related arrest history showed that he was a danger to the community and did not warrant release on bond. DHS appealed an Immigration Judge’s order releasing the respondent on a $15,000 bond.

The Board sustained DHS’s appeal and vacated the bond order. The Board emphasized that the respondent bore the burden of showing that he was not a danger to the community, that non-conviction conduct may be considered in the bond analysis, and that a dangerousness finding is dispositive without reaching flight risk.

The full text of Matter of Martinez-Rodriguez can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1442701/dl?inline

Sixth Circuit Finds Interior Arrests Are Governed by 8 USC 1226(a), Not Mandatory Detention Under 8 USC 1225(b)(2)(A)

The Sixth Circuit has determined that non-citizens arrested in the interior of the United States, years after entering without inspection, are not subject to mandatory detention under 8 USC 1225(b)(2)(A). Rather, the Court affirmed the district courts' grants of habeas relief and held that the petitioners were detained under 8 USC 1226(a), which permits bond. The Court also concluded that due process required individualized bond hearings for these non-citizens, rejecting the government's position that they could be detained without bond under the mandatory detention statute.

The full text of Lopez-Campos v. Raycraft can be found here: https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/26a0139p-06.pdf

BIA Finds FBI Letterhead Memorandum Warrants Significant Weight in Bond Proceedings

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that an FBI Letterhead Memorandum indicating that a respondent is a potential national security risk warrants significant weight in bond proceedings. The Board sustained DHS’s appeal, vacated the Immigration Judge’s bond order, and ordered the respondent detained without bond.

The Board explained that dangerousness determinations in bond proceedings may consider national security concerns and need not be limited to evidence of prior criminal conduct. The Board also rejected the respondent’s argument that the FBI memorandum was inherently unreliable because it was unsigned and unsworn, noting that immigration proceedings are not governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence and that government records prepared in the ordinary course of official duties carry strong indicia of reliability.

The full text of Matter of Shentu can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1438116/dl?inline

Second Circuit Finds that Individuals who Entered without Inspection Years Ago are Detained under 1226(a)

The Second Circuit has determined that non-citizens who entered the United States without inspection years ago are detained under 8 USC 1226, not 8 USC 1225.

The full text of Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden can be found here: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/OPN/25-3141_complete_opn.pdf

BIA Finds Detainee to be Flight Risk Due to Address Inconsistencies

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a non-citizen is a flight risk due to inconsistencies about his address.

“The Immigration Judge did not consider the significant discrepancies in the record regarding the respondent’s residence. According to the Form I-213, Record of Deportable/Inadmissible Alien, DHS agents encountered the respondent living and working at a business that was illegally growing marijuana in Oklahoma. The respondent’s bond request worksheet asserts he was detained by immigration officials “at [his] residence.” However, in the asylum application he filed with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the respondent indicated that he resides in California. The respondent’s purported sponsor also claims to live at the same address in California. The respondent bears the burden of resolving discrepancies in the record, and he has not done so here.”

The full text of Matter of Z-N-L- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1430911/dl?inline

Fifth Circuit Determines that all Non-citizens who Enter US without Inspection are Subject to Mandatory Detention

The Fifth Circuit has determined that all non-citizens who enter the United States without inspection are subject to mandatory detention under 8 USC 1225.

The full text of Buenrostro- Mendez v. Bondi can be found here:

https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/25/25-20496-CV0.pdf

BIA Reverses Bond Grant to Non-Citizen Recently Convicted of Statutory Rape

The Board of Immigration Appeals reversed the grant of bond to a non-citizen recently convicted of statutory rape and oral copulation with a 14-year-old girl. “The respondent’s behavior reflects a willingness and ability to manipulate vulnerable persons into engaging in unlawful conduct to meet his own desires and to do so at great harm to them.”

The full text of Matter of Cotrufo can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1415166/dl?inline