Background
Petitioners Fidencio Hernandez Alvarez and Ismael Cerro Perez, Mexican nationals who entered the United States without inspection but have resided in the country for years, were arrested following traffic stops. The Department of Homeland Security detained them without bond, classifying them as applicants for admission under Section twelve hundred twenty-five of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The district court granted habeas relief, ruling that Section twelve hundred twenty-six applied instead, entitling them to bond hearings. The Government appealed, arguing that all unadmitted aliens are inherently seeking admission.
The court’s reasoning
The court analyzed the text of Section twelve hundred twenty-five, subsection B, paragraph two, subparagraph A. It distinguished between the technical definition of an ‘applicant for admission’ and the active requirement of ‘seeking admission.’ The court found that while the statute deems present unadmitted aliens as applicants, the phrase ‘seeking admission’ requires an affirmative step to obtain lawful entry after inspection. Since the Petitioners were detained after traffic stops without pursuing lawful entry, they did not meet the second condition for mandatory detention.
What it means going forward
The decision allows unadmitted aliens present in the interior of the United States to request bond hearings, reversing the Government’s policy of mandatory detention for this group. It aligns the Eleventh Circuit with the majority of other circuits that have rejected the Government’s interpretation.