The ruling in Ferretiz Gonzalez v. Alligator Alcatraz et al resolves a critical circuit split regarding the statutory interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act and the scope of mandatory detention for noncitizens who are not seeking admission.
Petitioner Juan Carlos Ferretiz Gonzalez, who allegedly entered the United States illegally around 2003, challenged his detention by U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement. He argued that the Attorney General was unlawfully holding him under § 1225(b)(2), which mandates detention for applicants for admission, rather than under § 1226(a), which allows for discretionary release with a bond hearing.
The court agreed with the petitioner, holding that § 1226 applies to aliens already present in the United States. The judge relied on Supreme Court guidance in Jennings v. Rodriguez, noting that the statutory text of § 1225 requires a person to be both an “applicant for admission” and “seeking admission,” a present-tense action that cannot apply to someone already living in the country.
The decision explicitly rejects the Fifth Circuit’s recent ruling in Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, which adopted the government’s interpretation. The court found the Fifth Circuit’s reasoning unpersuasive and noted that the Seventh Circuit has also signaled skepticism toward the government’s position.
While granting the petition in part, the court denied the request for immediate release. The judge clarified that § 1226(a) grants the executive branch discretion to detain or release, meaning the petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing, not automatic freedom.
Claims under the Fifth Amendment and the Administrative Procedures Act were not addressed, as the court granted the relief the petitioner was entitled to under the INA. The petitioner may renew those claims if the government fails to provide the ordered bond hearing.