A recent federal court ruling in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz could make a real difference for many people who entered the U.S. without inspection. For most of 2025, the government treated all “EWI” individuals as if they were subject to mandatory detention with no possibility of a bond hearing. The court rejected that approach and confirmed that many people in this situation are actually detained under INA § 236(a), which does allow them to request bond.

That ruling applies nationwide to a certified class of individuals who entered without inspection, weren’t caught immediately at the border, and aren’t otherwise subject to mandatory detention. In plain terms, a lot of people the government claimed had no right to bond may now have one.

There’s a catch, though. According to class counsel, immigration judges in some places are still refusing to follow the ruling. When that happens, individuals may need to enforce their rights in federal court by filing a habeas petition. In other cases, a lawyer may still try to ask an immigration judge for bond first, especially in courts where judges will at least say what bond they would set, which can help speed up release later.

Even people the government says aren’t technically class members may still benefit, because the court’s reasoning supports a broader view that many detained EWIs fall under § 236(a) regardless.

This area of the law is still developing, habeas petitions abound, and appeals are already underway. But many practitioners are finding success for their clients in the wake of the Maldonado Bautista court’s ruling.

You can read the full practice guidance HERE.