Federal Court Rules in Favor of Trump-Era Immigrant Detention Policy

Divided appeals panel upholds administration's ability to detain undocumented immigrants without bond

Published on Feb. 7, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A divided federal appeals court panel in New Orleans ruled 2-1 in favor of the Trump administration's policy of detaining most undocumented immigrants without bond, a decision legal experts say is a serious blow to due process. The ruling reverses two lower court orders and upholds the administration's ability to detain immigrants, including those who have lived in the U.S. for years, pending deportation.

Why it matters

The decision marks a significant shift from past administrations that generally allowed unauthorized immigrants who had lived in the U.S. for years to attend bond hearings and argue they posed no flight risk. The ruling expands the government's detention powers, which critics say erodes constitutional rights and due process.

The details

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled that the Trump administration's reversal of three decades of practice by previous administrations is legally sound under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. The majority opinion stated that 'the text [of the law] says what it says, regardless of the decisions of prior administrations.' However, the dissenting judge argued that Congress did not intend to require the detention without bond of millions of immigrants already living in the U.S.

  • The federal appeals court panel issued its ruling on February 7, 2026.

The players

5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

The federal appeals court that issued the ruling in favor of the Trump administration's immigrant detention policy.

Judge Edith Jones

A Reagan appointee who wrote the majority opinion upholding the administration's detention policy.

Judge Dana M. Douglas

A Biden appointee who dissented, arguing the administration's position is 'totally unsupported.'

Pam Bondi

The U.S. Attorney General who hailed the ruling as a 'significant blow against activist judges.'

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick

A senior fellow at the American Immigration Council who criticized the decision as 'AWFUL news for due process.'

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The text [of the IIRIRA] says what it says, regardless of the decisions of prior administrations. That prior administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority… does not mean they lacked the authority to do more.”

— Judge Edith Jones

“The Congress that passed IIRIRA would be surprised to learn it had also required the detention without bond of two million people. For almost 30 years there was no sign anyone thought it had done so, and nothing in the congressional record or the history of the statute's enforcement suggests that it did.”

— Judge Dana M. Douglas

“AWFUL news for due process. This decision will wipe out the availability of release through bond for tens of thousands of people detained in or transported to Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi by ICE.”

— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, Senior Fellow, American Immigration Council (Twitter)

“This is a significant blow against activist judges who have been undermining our efforts to make America safe again at every turn.”

— Pam Bondi, U.S. Attorney General

What’s next

The ruling only applies to the three states under the 5th Circuit's jurisdiction, but there are numerous other legal challenges to the administration's detention policy in courts across the country.

The takeaway

This decision represents a major shift in immigration enforcement, expanding the government's ability to detain undocumented immigrants without bond and eroding long-standing due process protections. It is likely to face continued legal challenges, but marks a significant victory for the Trump administration's hardline immigration policies.