Maldonado Bautista Bond Hearings: Federal Court Confirms Bond Eligibility for Thousands Detained After Entering Without Inspection
A major federal court ruling has reshaped the rights of people held in immigration detention after entering the United States without inspection. In Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, the court certified a nationwide class and confirmed that thousands of individuals previously denied a bond hearing are legally entitled to one. The decision restores long-standing bond hearing rights that were eliminated in 2025 under the government’s no bond policy.
What the Maldonado Bautista Decision Says
On November 25, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled that people who entered without inspection are detained under section 1226(a), not section 1225(b). This matters because detention under 1226(a) allows individuals to request bond and appear before an immigration judge who must decide whether continued detention is justified.
The government’s 2025 policy had treated every person who entered without inspection as automatically subject to mandatory detention. The Maldonado Bautista ruling rejects that interpretation and confirms that these individuals are legally eligible for bond hearings nationwide.
Who Qualifies as a Maldonado Bautista Class Member
The certified class includes:
- noncitizens without lawful status
- who entered or will enter the United States without inspection
- who were not apprehended upon arrival
- who are not detained under sections 1226(c), 1225(b)(1), or 1231 at the time DHS made its custody decision
Two groups commonly qualify:
• Those who entered without inspection, lived in the United States for some time, and were later detained by immigration authorities.
• Those initially detained near the border, released, and later re-detained after living here.
Individuals with certain criminal charges may fall under mandatory detention, which can affect eligibility.
Background: The Government’s No Bond Policy for EWIs
In 2025, DHS and the Board of Immigration Appeals issued guidance and precedent stating that people who entered without inspection remained “applicants for admission,” making them automatically subject to mandatory detention. The key decision was Matter of Yajure Hurtado, which immigration judges were required to follow.
The result was that thousands of people were detained with no opportunity to seek bond, even if they had long-standing ties to the United States. District courts rejected this interpretation, leading to the Maldonado Bautista litigation.
The Current Problem: Immigration Judges Are Ignoring the Court’s Order
Although the Maldonado Bautista ruling is a nationwide declaratory judgment, immigration judges across the country are being instructed not to apply it. Practitioners report that judges are refusing to schedule or grant bond hearings, claiming lack of jurisdiction or stating that the ruling is not final.
For this reason, many individuals will need to pursue relief in federal court to enforce their right to a bond hearing.
How to Request a Bond Hearing Under Maldonado Bautista
There are two pathways:
1. File a Habeas Petition in Federal Court
Because immigration courts are not complying, filing a writ of habeas corpus is often the most reliable and fastest strategy. A habeas petition should argue:
• the person is a Maldonado Bautista class member
• the declaratory judgment requires treatment under section 1226(a)
• the individual has a statutory right to a bond hearing or release
Federal courts have authority to enforce declaratory judgments when administrative bodies refuse to comply.
2. Request a Bond Hearing First
In some jurisdictions, attorneys may request a bond hearing with supporting documentation. If the judge denies jurisdiction but issues an alternative bond amount, that amount can then be enforced through a habeas petition. This may save time for individuals seeking faster release.
What Happens Next in the Maldonado Bautista Litigation
The government is not complying with the ruling, and class counsel is preparing additional legal action to enforce the judgment. Multiple appeals are already pending across several circuits, and more developments are expected in the coming months. Compliance problems are widespread, and continued federal court intervention is likely.
What This Means for Detained Individuals and Families
The Maldonado Bautista decision is one of the most important immigration detention rulings in recent years. It confirms that individuals who entered without inspection are not categorically barred from bond and cannot be held indefinitely under a blanket mandatory detention policy.
However, because immigration judges are refusing to apply the ruling, enforcement will depend heavily on federal habeas litigation.
If you or a loved one is detained after entering without inspection, speak with an attorney immediately about:
• determining class membership
• requesting a bond hearing
• filing a habeas petition if the government refuses to comply
Your ability to seek release now depends on asserting the rights confirmed by this ruling.