Removal Orders

 

Supreme Court Denies Bond Hearings to People Pursuing Protection Claims Who Have Prior Removal Orders

The Supreme Court issued a decision on June 29 in the Johnson v. Guzman Chavez case. The majority of the justices determined that people with prior removal orders are subject to mandatory detention, even while they pursue proceedings to stop their deportation to a country where they established they have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture.

Without the opportunity to be released on bond, these individuals face months and even years in detention as they pursue protection in what are known as withholding-only proceedings. Withholding of removal is a form of protection that prohibits the U.S. government from deporting someone to a country where they will be persecuted or tortured.

At issue in the case was which of two sections in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) apply to individuals with prior removal orders who are waiting to appear before an Immigration Judge to argue their claim for protection.

The Supreme Court sided with the government. In his opinion, Justice Samuel Alito concluded that the provision—8 U.S.C. § 1231 of the INA—that subjects individuals to mandatory detention applies to those with prior removal orders who are pursuing withholding of removal because the prior removal orders are “administratively final.”

Lawyers for the individuals seeking protection argued that another provision—8 U.S.C. § 1226—that provides the opportunity for release from detention on bond should apply to individuals with prior removal orders who are in withholding-only proceedings because a decision on whether an individual will be deported remains pending.