The United States has enacted a major shift in immigration enforcement with the Department of Homeland Security announcing that most undocumented immigrants will no longer be entitled to bond hearings before immigration judges. The policy, introduced last week through an internal directive from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), dramatically expands mandatory detention by reinterpreting a key provision of immigration law—effectively removing judicial discretion from most release decisions.

United States

Department of Homeland Security

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Under the new guidance, individuals who entered the country without authorization—even if they have lived in the U.S. for years without criminal records—are to be treated as “applicants for admission” under Section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. This designation renders them subject to mandatory detention without the possibility of release on bond, a departure from long-standing practice that allowed many to petition immigration judges for release while awaiting court proceedings.

Section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act

The change applies nationwide and took effect immediately. According to ICE, this shift closes a “loophole” that, until now, permitted large numbers of undocumented individuals to live freely in the U.S. while their cases proceeded. ICE officials maintain the policy reflects a revised legal position developed in coordination with the Department of Justice.

ICE

Department of Justice

“The American people deserve a system that treats all unlawful entrants equally,” said Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security. “By bringing our enforcement into alignment with what the law clearly authorizes, we’re ensuring public safety and the integrity of our immigration process.”

Department of Homeland Security

Critics, however, describe the measure as a sweeping expansion of detention authority that undermines due process. Immigration attorneys and advocates argue the new framework affords unchecked power to ICE officials, who now control parole decisions typically reviewed by judges. According to Greg Chen of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the change “deprives hundreds of thousands of their liberty without individualized hearings.” He added that the policy “breaks from decades of precedent and effectively criminalizes presence alone.”

ICE

Greg Chen of the American Immigration Lawyers Association

Advocates say the timing of the change—just weeks after the passage of a sweeping immigration funding bill—suggests a coordinated effort to increase detention capacity. The appropriations package, informally called the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” includes $45 billion for ICE detention and expands programs that deputize local law enforcement to carry out federal immigration duties.

ICE

Among them is the controversial 287(g) program, which allows local police to act as immigration agents. According to the American Immigration Council, $14 billion has been allocated to expand this program to more than 6,000 officers across over 300 jurisdictions.

287(g) program

American Immigration Council

The policy also comes amid a broader escalation in immigration enforcement under President Trump’s second term. Since January, ICE has stepped up coordinated raids, including sweeps targeting universities and workplaces, leading to clashes with demonstrators and concern from civil liberties groups.

President Trump

ICE

“This administration clearly aims to remove the guardrails from immigration enforcement,” said Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center. “Whether it’s eliminating bond or expanding cooperation with local police, the goal seems to be incarceration over integration.”

Marielena Hincapié

National Immigration Law Center

Supporters argue previous policies allowed prolonged legal limbo, citing that detaining migrants without bond may streamline legal processes and reduce missed hearings. DHS officials insist the new rules increase system efficiency.

DHS

Legal observers predict imminent court battles. Attorneys representing immigrants nationwide argue that indefinite detention without bond violates constitutional protections like due process. Previous attempts to widen detention have faced judicial resistance over concerns about oversight and legality.

due process

“This isn’t just a procedural shift—it’s a fundamental redefinition of how the government treats immigrants,” noted César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández, a law professor at Ohio State University. “It marks a turning point in the legal architecture of immigration enforcement.”

César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández

Ohio State University