Supreme Court To Consider Legality Of Indefinite Detention Of Inadmissible Immigrant

IMMIGRATION LAW & POLICY

Arrest and Detention

Supreme Court to consider legality of indefinite detention of inadmissible immigrant
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 17, 2004

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted a petition for writ of certiorari to consider whether under immigration law the government may indefinitely detain inadmissible immigrants. The case may resolve a split that has developed among the circuit courts of appeal. The petitioner, a Cuban who entered the U.S. during the 1980 Mariel Boatlift, seeks to overturn an adverse decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

In Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), the Court ruled that section 241(a)(6) of the Immigration and Nationality Act did not authorize the indefinite detention of lawful permanent residents with final removal orders. The Court instead interpreted the statute as authorizing detention only for the period of time reasonably necessary to carry out the removal. Because the petitioners in Zadvydas were lawful permanent residents, the Court did not determine whether the same limitation applies to the detention of inadmissible immigrants under the statute. The Sixth Circuit and the Ninth Circuit have ruled that the reasonableness limitation of Zadvydas applies to the detention of inadmissible immigrants, while the Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits have found that the limitation does not apply. Compare Rosales-Garcia v. Holland, 322 F.3d 386 (6th Cir. 2003) (en banc) and Xi v. INS, 298 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2002); with Rios v. INS, 324 F.3d 296 (5th Cir. 2003), Hoyt-Mesa v. Ashcroft, 272 F.3d 989 (7th Cir. 2001), Borrero v. Aljets, 325 F.3d 1003 (8th Cir. 2003), and Benitez v. Wallis, 337 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2003).

Benitez v. Wallis, Dist. Dir., INS, 72 U.S.L.W. 3463 (Jan. 16, 2004).