最高法院周四同意审理一起针对ICE强制拘留政策的重大挑战，此前特朗普政府请求大法官们审理此案。
The Supreme Court agreed Thursday to hear a blockbuster challenge to ICE's mandatory detention policy after the Trump administration asked the justices to review the case.
此案的判决结果将决定某些在等待驱逐期间被移民拘留的非公民是否有权获得保释听证，这是一个联邦上诉法院意见分歧的问题。
The outcome of this case will determine whether certain noncitizens held in immigration detention while awaiting deportation are entitled to bond hearings, an issue that has divided the federal appeals courts.
九个联邦上诉法院已驳回特朗普政府对1996年《非法移民改革和移民责任法》的解释。目前提交最高法院的案件源于美国第二巡回上诉法院的裁决。第五和第八巡回法院持相反观点，裁定特朗普政府可以要求强制拘留某些非公民，而无需提供保释听证。
Nine federal appeals courts have rejected the Trump administration's interpretation of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. The case now before the Supreme Court stems from a ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 5th and 8th U.S. Circuits have taken the opposite view, ruling that the Trump administration may require the mandatory detention of certain noncitizens without offering them bond hearings.
索托马约尔拒绝母亲在种族歧视斗争中让儿子进入纽约市精英学校的请求。提交最高法院的案件围绕巴西公民Ricardo Aparecido Barbosa da Cunha展开，他二十多年前未经检查进入美国，于2016年申请庇护，并在申请审理期间获得工作授权。ICE于2025年9月逮捕了他，并辩称他在驱逐案件审理期间应被强制拘留，无需保释听证。
SOTOMAYOR DENIES MOM'S BID TO GET SON INTO ELITE NYC SCHOOL ADMID RACIAL DISCRIMINATION FIGHT The case before the Supreme Court centers on Ricardo Aparecido Barbosa da Cunha, a Brazilian citizen who entered the United States without inspection more than two decades ago, applied for asylum in 2016 and was granted work authorization while his application was pending. ICE arrested him in September 2025 and argued he was subject to mandatory detention without a bond hearing while his removal case proceeded.
Barbosa da Cunha对政府对联邦移民法的解释提出挑战，辩称他的拘留受另一条款管辖，该条款允许移民法官举行保释听证。地区法院表示同意，美国第二巡回法院予以确认。
Barbosa da Cunha challenged the government's interpretation of federal immigration law, arguing his detention was governed by a different provision that permits immigration judges to hold bond hearings. The district court agreed, and the 2nd U.S. Circuit affirmed.
地区法院裁定Barbosa da Cunha有权获得保释听证，因为他的拘留受《移民和国籍法》另一条款管辖。一名移民法官随后认定他不构成逃跑风险或对社区构成危险，下令他保释释放。保罗·德怀尔律师事务所的律师保罗·德怀尔在一份声明中表示：“巴尔博萨·达·库尼亚先生过去22年一直居住在美国。他是一名勤奋工作的小企业主，拥有美国公民家庭，且无犯罪记录。他从未缺席任何移民预约或听证会。在没有保释可能性的情况下拘留他，除了惩罚其移民身份外毫无意义，而所有审理过其案件的法院均已明确驳回了这一做法。我们确信最高法院会持相同观点。”
The district court ruled Barbosa da Cunha was entitled to a bond hearing because his detention was governed by a different provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act. An immigration judge later found he did not pose a flight risk or danger to the community and ordered him released on bond. SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER "Mr. Barbosa da Cunha has been living in the U.S. for the last 22 years," attorney Paul Dwyer of the Law Office of Paul Dwyer PC said in a statement. "He is a hard-working, small-business owner, with a U.S. citizen family and no criminal history. He has never missed an immigration appointment or hearing.
美国公民自由联盟移民权利项目副主任迈克尔·K·T·陈在声明中表示：“法院已多次且有力地驳斥了特朗普政府对法律的极端曲解。政府无论如何试图扭曲法律，都无法在没有保释听证会的情况下将移民拘留数月甚至数年。这不仅残酷且不人道，更是违法的。我们期待向最高法院阐明这一立场。” 此案正值唐纳德·特朗普总统将大规模驱逐非法移民作为其第二任期的核心政策，在全国范围内部署移民执法行动，并授权扩建移民拘留中心以实现这一目标。
Detaining him without the possibility of release on bond serves no purpose other than to punish him for being an immigrant, and has been solidly rejected by every court to have considered his case. We are confident that the Supreme Court will agree." "The courts have repeatedly and resoundingly rejected the Trump administration’s radical misinterpretation of the law," Michael K.T. Tan, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. said in a statement. "Try as it might, the government cannot twist the law to detain immigrants for months or even years on end without a bond hearing. Not only is it cruel and inhumane; it is unlawful.
据美国移民委员会数据，自特朗普重返白宫以来，截至1月中旬，被拘留人数已增至超过73,000人，一年内增长了75%。
We look forward to making that case to the Supreme Court." The case comes as President Donald Trump has made mass deportations of illegal immigrants a centerpiece to his second term, deploying immigration enforcement operations across the country and authorizing expansions of immigration detention centers to help meet the goal.
提交至最高法院的此案与索尔（Sauer）提交的请愿书如出一辙，两者均涉及对犯罪移民（包括非法移民和合法居留者）实施强制拘留的合宪性问题。该案（Genalo v. D.C.）此前因民主党籍纽约州州长凯西·霍楚尔赦免了案件核心当事人而被裁定为无实际意义。预计本任期稍后将举行口头辩论。
Since Trump's return to office, the population of detainees has grown to over 73,000 as of mid-January, jumping by 75% in one year, according to the American Immigration Council. The case before the Supreme Court mirrors a petition submitted by Sauer, which also deals with the constitutionality of mandatory detentions for immigrants, both illegal and with lawful status, who have committed crimes. The case, Genalo v. D.C., was previously ruled moot after Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul pardoned the migrant at the center of the case. Oral arguments are expected to be held later this term.