Trump Administration Seeks Supreme Court Review on Immigration Detention

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to review a lower court's decision concerning the due process rights of noncitizens detained under immigration law. This action follows the dismissal of a similar case earlier this month.

On September 11, the administration informed the Supreme Court that *Genalo v. Black*, an immigration case scheduled for argument in October, was moot. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer stated the administration hoped the justices would still "resolve the questions presented" during the 2026-27 term. He indicated his team would work to "identify alternative vehicles" to bring the issue back to the court.

Ten days later, on September 21, the administration filed a new petition for review, *Genalo v. D.C.* This petition covers similar legal ground as the dismissed case. The administration bypassed the federal appeals court, which typically weighs in before Supreme Court review. Sauer wrote that the Court has previously granted "certiorari before judgment to allow a case to replace one that was dismissed," and urged the justices to "do the same here."

Both *Genalo v. Black* and *Genalo v. D.C.* address due process rights under the Fifth Amendment and Section 1226(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. This section mandates the detention of noncitizens, including green card holders, who have committed certain crimes and face removal proceedings. The core question is whether noncitizens detained for extended periods under Section 1226(c) have a due process right to a bond hearing, and what the government must demonstrate to justify continued detention if such a hearing becomes necessary.

In 2018, the Supreme Court addressed Section 1226(c) in *Jennings v. Rodriguez*, ruling that the statute itself does not require periodic bond hearings. During that case, the justices considered, but did not resolve, the question of whether due process eventually requires such hearings during lengthy detentions.

In June, the court granted review in *Genalo v. Black* to answer this question. The noncitizens in that case, Carol Williams Black and Keisy G.M., had been detained for approximately seven and 21 months, respectively, under Section 1226(c). Black voluntarily left the United States before the justices agreed to hear the case. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul pardoned G.M. in August, which meant he was no longer deportable under the statute. In September, the Trump administration and attorneys for the challengers agreed to dismiss the case.

*Genalo v. D.C.* involves a man identified as D.C. in court filings. He was born in the Dominican Republic in 1963 and "unlawfully entered the United States" "at an unknown time and place," according to the petition. While in the U.S., D.C. has "been convicted of multiple crimes." The Department of Homeland Security detained him under Section 1226(c) in September 2025 after his most recent prison stay concluded. In March, D.C. challenged his detention as a violation of his due process rights. A federal district court agreed he had a constitutional right to a bond hearing. That bond hearing occurred, and D.C. was released from DHS custody on March 31.

The Trump administration has requested the Supreme Court review the district court ruling in *Genalo v. D.C.* and add the issue of immigration detention without bond to the 2026-27 oral argument docket. D.C.'s response is due by October 21.

In a second petition filed on September 21, the Trump administration asked the justices to address the authority of district courts over claims by a noncitizen challenging the validity of his detention while awaiting removal proceedings. This petition focuses on cases where the claims also concern the validity of the grounds for removal, an area district courts typically lack authority to review. This case involves the Trump administration's detention of Georgetown University scholar Badar Khan Suri and the initiation of removal proceedings against him.