Federal courts across the U.S. have ordered bond hearings and, in some cases, immediate release for several Indian immigration detainees, questioning whether authorities applied the correct detention provisions and raising concerns about prolonged detention without due process.
A wave of federal court decisions across the United States this week delivered significant relief to several Indian nationals held in immigration detention, with judges ordering bond hearings — and in some cases immediate release — after finding potential due process violations.
District courts in California, Michigan, New York and Oklahoma reviewed habeas corpus petitions filed by detainees who argued they were being held under the wrong section of the Immigration and Nationality Act or without adequate constitutional protections. In multiple rulings, judges sided with the petitioners.
In San Diego, a federal judge granted habeas relief to Harbeet Singh, ordering immigration authorities to provide an individualized bond hearing within seven days. The court determined that his prolonged detention without a bond review had become unreasonable and violated due process. The government must now demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he poses either a flight risk or a danger to the community.
A similar decision came from the Western District of Michigan in the case of Sagar Ram. The court conditionally granted his petition and directed officials to conduct a bond hearing under Section 1226(a) within five business days or release him. The judge rejected the government’s claim that he was subject to mandatory detention.
In Oklahoma, a federal court ruled in favor of Karandeep Singh, concluding that his detention falls under Section 1226(a), which permits bond eligibility, rather than Section 1225(b)(2), which mandates detention for certain applicants for admission. The court ordered a prompt bond hearing.
In Brooklyn, a federal judge granted habeas relief to Harmanpreet Singh and required a new bond hearing, again placing the burden on the government to prove he is a flight risk or danger. The court found that continued detention without sufficient procedural safeguards violated the Fifth Amendment.
Other rulings in California went further. One federal judge ordered the immediate release of Bhawandeep Singh Dhaliwal from Department of Homeland Security custody and barred authorities from re-arresting him without constitutionally adequate process. In another San Diego case, Vikrant Singh was ordered released under the same terms and conditions as his prior release.
However, not all petitions succeeded. In Michigan, a federal judge denied relief to Gurpreet Walia Singh, finding that he had already received a custody redetermination and that his detention did not violate federal law or constitutional protections. An Oklahoma court similarly denied another challenge to a bond decision after adopting a magistrate judge’s recommendation.
At the heart of these cases is a legal dispute over which detention provision applies. Section 1225 of the Immigration and Nationality Act generally mandates detention for certain individuals seeking admission to the U.S., while Section 1226 allows for bond eligibility for noncitizens already present in the country. Courts in several of this week’s rulings determined that authorities may have relied on the wrong provision, opening the door for bond hearings and, in some cases, release.
