Policy Update: 10/01/26
Supreme Court will review detention without bond hearings
What’s happening
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, a case challenging the federal government’s policy of holding many immigrants without giving them a bond hearing. A bond hearing allows a judge to decide whether someone can return home, sometimes after paying money, while their immigration case continues.
The policy applies to some immigrants who entered the country without authorization, including people who have lived in the United States for years or decades. Before the policy changed in 2025, many people arrested away from the border could ask an immigration judge for release on bond.
The Court is expected to hear arguments in early 2027 and issue a decision by the end of June 2027.
Why it matters
The Court will decide whether the government may treat people already living inside the United States like people who have just arrived at the border, and therefore hold them throughout their deportation cases without a bond hearing. Those cases can take months or years.
Lower courts have disagreed about whether the policy is legal. Immigrants filed more than 73,000 federal court cases seeking release in 2026, showing how widely the policy has affected families and the court system.
Potential impact
There is no immediate nationwide change. The Supreme Court has agreed to review the policy but has not yet decided whether it is legal.
If the government wins, more immigrants could be detained without an individual bond hearing while their cases move forward.
If the challengers win, more detained immigrants may be able to ask a judge for release.
A bond hearing does not guarantee release; it gives the person an opportunity to make their case to a judge.
The final ruling will apply nationwide, including in Mississippi.
Sources
Reuters: Supreme Court to weigh Trump’s mandatory immigration detention policy
SCOTUSblog: Court agrees to hear arguments in important immigration case
New York Times: Justices will review migrant detention policy
Columbia Missourian: Supreme Court grants review of mandatory detention policy
Federal judge blocks ICE’s courthouse-arrest policy
What’s happening
A federal judge in New York ruled that ICE’s policy of arresting immigrants at immigration courthouses was unlawful, calling it “arbitrary and capricious.” The ruling currently affects immigration courts nationwide.
Since 2025, ICE agents have arrested people as they left required immigration hearings.
The federal government argued that courthouse arrests were safer and more efficient than searching for people in their communities.
Why it matters
People in immigration proceedings are generally required to attend their hearings. Arrests at courthouses can make immigrants afraid to appear, even when they are trying to follow the law, present their case, or support a family member.
Missing a hearing can have serious consequences, including an order of removal issued while the person is absent. The ruling aims to protect access to the courts without the courthouse itself becoming a routine location for ICE arrests.
Impact
ICE is currently prohibited from using the challenged courthouse-arrest policy.
Immigrants should continue attending required hearings unless an attorney or the court gives different instructions.
The ruling may make it safer for immigrants, witnesses, and family members to participate in court proceedings.
The federal government can appeal. A higher court could pause, narrow, or overturn the ruling.
The decision does not prevent every possible immigration arrest or guarantee that enforcement will not happen near a courthouse. People with individual concerns should develop a safety plan with an attorney.
Source
Newsday: Federal agents forbidden by judge from arresting immigrants at court hearings
California adopts new limits and oversight measures for immigration enforcement
What’s happening
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed 21 immigration-related bills. The new laws address ICE tactics, detention centers, courthouse arrests, state property, enforcement vehicles, civil-rights claims, family assistance, and oversight of detention facilities.
Key measures include:
Requiring identification and a valid judicial warrant for certain immigration arrests within 1,000 feet of California courthouses.
Restricting the use of California-owned property for immigration-enforcement staging, processing, or detention.
Requiring many rental vehicles used for federal enforcement to display the agency’s name, with exceptions.
Banning wearable electric-shock devices and restricting flash-bang grenades.
Preventing the expansion or conversion of buildings into new immigration detention centers through certain local permits.
Creating a 25% tax on private detention-center operators, with projected revenue supporting immigration legal services.
Allowing state investigations into fatal shootings of unarmed civilians by immigration officers.
Most highlighted measures take effect January 1, 2027. The private-detention tax is scheduled to take effect July 1, 2028.
Why it matters
States cannot rewrite federal immigration law, but they can control state property, regulate facilities and law-enforcement practices, provide state benefits, and create transparency requirements. California is using those powers to increase oversight and reduce the use of state resources for federal immigration enforcement.
Potential impact
Immigrant communities in California may receive stronger protections around courthouses and greater information about some enforcement operations.
The laws may increase oversight of detention conditions and provide additional funding for legal services.
Restrictions on state property and detention-center expansion may make it harder to increase detention capacity in California.
Several provisions could face federal court challenges because states generally cannot directly control federal officers.
These are California laws. They do not create the same protections in Mississippi or other states. However, they may serve as models for legislation or local policies elsewhere.
Sources
LA Public Press: Newsom puts new limits on ICE
Office of Governor Gavin Newsom: Immigration legislation signed
