Immigration Bond Hearings: How to Get Released

How immigration bond works

The power to hold someone while the government decides whether to deport them comes from 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (INA § 236(a)). Under that section the government may keep the person detained, or release them on bond of at least $1,500 or on conditional parole. The $1,500 is a floor, not a price: the actual amount is set case by case. Release on bond does not by itself give permission to work (§ 1226(a)(3)), and the government can revoke a bond and re-arrest the person at any time (§ 1226(b)).

There are two decision-makers:

1. ICE decides first. After an arrest, an ICE officer decides whether to release the person and on what bond. To be released, the person must show the officer that release “would not pose a danger to property or persons” and that they are “likely to appear for any future proceeding” (8 C.F.R. § 236.1(c)(8)).
2. An immigration judge can review it. If ICE denies release or sets a bond the family cannot pay, the detained person can ask an immigration judge for a custody redetermination — the “bond hearing” — at any time before a removal order becomes final (8 C.F.R. § 1236.1(d)(1)).

What happens at a bond hearing

A bond hearing is a separate proceeding from the deportation case itself: the regulation says it “shall form no part of” the removal hearing (8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(d)). The request can be made orally, in writing or, if the judge allows, by telephone (§ 1003.19(b)); EOIR’s Policy Manual, chapter 8.3 explains that requests are ordinarily made in writing and describes what to file.

The detained person carries the burden. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has held that the judge must first decide whether the person is a danger to the community, and only if they are not does the judge consider flight risk and set an amount (Matter of Urena, 25 I&N Dec. 140 (BIA 2009); Matter of Adeniji, 22 I&N Dec. 1102 (BIA 1999)). In Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2006), the BIA listed the factors a judge may weigh:

• whether the person has a fixed address in the United States;
• how long they have lived here, and their family ties;
• their employment history;
• their record of appearing in court;
• their criminal record, including how extensive, recent and serious it is;
• their history of immigration violations;
• any attempt to flee prosecution or otherwise escape authorities; and
• the manner of entry to the United States.

Guerra also holds that a judge may consider criminal charges or arrests even without a conviction. In practice, evidence of a stable address, family (especially U.S. citizen or permanent resident relatives), work, community letters and a record of showing up for court or check-ins is what a bond case is built on. If bond is denied, a later request needs a showing that circumstances have “changed materially” since the last decision (§ 1003.19(e)).

If a family member is detained now, see what to do first on our deportation defense lawyer page.

To have a former U.S. Immigration Judge prepare and present a bond request, see our immigration bond lawyer page; our immigration bond document checklist lists the evidence to gather. For how bond differs from ICE parole, see immigration bond vs. parole.

Who is eligible — and who is not

Bond is available only to people held under § 1226(a). Several groups are held under other provisions that do not allow an immigration judge to set bond:

• Mandatory detention under § 1226(c). People who are inadmissible or deportable on listed criminal grounds (for example certain drug offenses, aggravated felonies and some crimes involving moral turpitude) or on terrorism grounds “shall” be taken into custody when released from criminal custody (8 U.S.C. § 1226(c)). An immigration judge cannot redetermine their custody (8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(h)(2)(i)(D)).
• The Laken Riley Act group. Since January 29, 2025, § 1226(c)(1)(E) also requires detention of people who entered without inspection or are inadmissible for fraud or lack of documents and who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of or admit burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault of a law enforcement officer, or a crime that results in death or serious bodily injury (Laken Riley Act, Pub. L. 119-1). An arrest alone is enough to trigger it.
• Arriving aliens — people stopped at a port of entry — cannot get bond from an immigration judge (§ 1003.19(h)(2)(i)(B)); release, if any, is by ICE parole.
• People in expedited removal who passed a credible fear interview. The Attorney General held in Matter of M-S-, 27 I&N Dec. 509 (A.G. 2019) that they are ineligible for bond unless DHS grants parole. (See our explainer on expedited removal and credible fear.)
• People with a final removal order are held under a different statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1231. The Supreme Court held in Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, 596 U.S. 573 (2022) that § 1231(a)(6) does not require a bond hearing after six months. (Read our articles on that decision and on detention after a removal order.)

Whether someone really falls into a no-bond category is often contestable. A person held as mandatory can ask for a Joseph hearing, where the judge decides whether they are “properly included” in § 1226(c); they are not if it is “substantially unlikely” that DHS will prevail on the charge that triggers it (Matter of Joseph, 22 I&N Dec. 799 (BIA 1999)). The Supreme Court has held that the statute itself does not require periodic bond hearings for people in § 1225(b) or § 1226(c) detention (Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281 (2018)); constitutional challenges to prolonged detention are brought in federal court, usually by habeas corpus.

The 2025–26 changes: who gets a bond hearing now

The biggest change in decades concerns people who entered the United States without inspection and were later arrested inside the country. For years they were treated as held under § 1226(a) and could ask a judge for bond. That changed in three steps:

1. May 15, 2025 — Matter of Q. Li, 29 I&N Dec. 66 (BIA 2025). The BIA held that an applicant for admission arrested without a warrant while arriving is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b), not § 1226(a), and is not eligible for bond; if parole is later ended, the person returns to § 1225(b) custody.
2. July 8, 2025 — ICE interim guidance. ICE issued non-public guidance titled “Interim Guidance Regarding Detention Authority for Applicants for Admission,” treating everyone who entered without inspection as held under § 1225(b)(2)(A), which says such a person “shall be detained.” Federal appeals courts have described and quoted it (for example the Second Circuit in Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden).
3. September 5, 2025 — Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025). The BIA held that “Immigration Judges lack authority to hear bond requests or to grant bond to aliens who are present in the United States without admission.” Immigration judges follow this precedent.

Federal courts of appeals have not accepted this reading uniformly; the next section shows where each circuit stands.

Two procedural points also changed in 2026. A February 2026 EOIR rule tried to shorten the deadline to appeal to the BIA to 10 days; a federal court set that change aside, and EOIR told its judges in Policy Memorandum 26-02 (March 13, 2026) not to advise parties that the deadline is 10 days. The BIA Policy Manual, chapter 6.3 states that a bond appeal has the same 30-day deadline as any other appeal and no filing fee. (Some published versions of the regulation still show the 10-day text; rely on the Policy Manual and the memo.)

Bond eligibility by circuit: the split and the Supreme Court

As of September 29, 2026, the federal courts of appeals are split 9–2 on whether a person who entered without inspection and was later arrested inside the United States is held under § 1225(b)(2)(A), with no bond hearing, or under § 1226(a), where an immigration judge can set bond.

• Nine circuits hold that § 1226(a) applies, so a bond hearing is available: the First (Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz, Aug. 13, 2026), Second (Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden, Apr. 28, 2026), Third (Buele Morocho, Aug. 28, 2026), Fourth (Lopez Garcia v. Guadian, Sept. 10, 2026), Sixth (Lopez-Campos v. Raycraft, May 11, 2026), Seventh (Cirrus Rojas v. Olson, July 30, 2026), Ninth (Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, July 30, 2026), Tenth (Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin) and Eleventh (Hernandez Alvarez, May 6, 2026) Circuits.
• Two circuits side with the government (no bond hearing): the Fifth (Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, Feb. 6, 2026) and the Eighth (Avila v. Bondi).
• The Supreme Court has agreed to decide the question, but has not yet ruled. On October 1, 2026 it granted review in Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, No. 26-104, the government’s appeal from the Second Circuit. Two other petitions on the same question, Nos. 25-1415 and 26-43, showed no order as of October 6, 2026. Until the Court rules, the circuit decisions above still apply; check the docket for later orders.

What this means in practice: where a person is detained now matters. Inside the immigration courts, Yajure Hurtado still binds the judges, so relief for someone who entered without inspection often comes through a habeas petition in federal district court, applying that circuit’s law. Someone held at Conroe or Port Isabel in Texas (Fifth Circuit) faces different law from someone held at Krome in Florida or Stewart in Georgia (Eleventh Circuit), Eloy, Otay Mesa or Tacoma (Ninth Circuit), Aurora (Tenth Circuit), Varick Street in New York (Second Circuit) or Elizabeth in New Jersey (Third Circuit). Our list of all immigration courts shows which courts hear detained cases.

When the government or the detainee disagrees

Either side can appeal an immigration judge’s bond decision to the BIA on Form EOIR-26, filed separately from any appeal in the removal case (BIA Policy Manual 6.3). The judge’s decision stays in effect while the appeal is pending — with one important exception. If ICE had denied release or set a bond of $10,000 or more, DHS can file Form EOIR-43 within one business day and automatically stay the judge’s order, keeping the person detained while the BIA decides DHS’s appeal (8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(i)(2)).

How bond is posted and refunded

Bond set by a judge or by ICE is paid to ICE, not to the court. According to ICE’s bonds page:

• Who can pay. U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, law firms and non-profit organizations can post a delivery bond through ICE’s online system, CeBONDS. The person who posts it (the obligor) needs accepted identification — for a citizen, for example, a passport, birth certificate, naturalization certificate, REAL ID or military ID; for a permanent resident, a green card or military ID. The detained person cannot post their own delivery bond.
• How to pay. Payments through CeBONDS are made by Fedwire or ACH bank transfer. Bonds can be posted Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. in the detained person’s time zone, excluding federal holidays. In-person payment is handled case by case.
• Bond companies. Someone without bank access can use an immigration bond company; a surety bond must come from a company on the Treasury Department’s list of certified sureties. Fees paid to a bond company are generally not refunded.
• The paperwork. The bond contract is Form I-352. The obligor must keep ICE informed of address changes (Form I-333) and make sure the released person attends every hearing and ICE appointment.
• Getting the money back. When the case ends and the conditions were met, ICE cancels the bond (Form I-391) and refunds a cash bond with interest to the obligor. If the person fails to appear, ICE declares the bond breached (Form I-323) and keeps the principal.

To find where a person is held, use ICE’s Online Detainee Locator System with their A-number or name and country of birth. A separate voluntary departure bond — at least $500, posted within five business days of the judge’s order — applies when a judge grants voluntary departure at the end of proceedings (8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(c)(3)).

After release

Release on bond does not end the case. The removal case continues — usually on a non-detained court’s docket — and the person must attend every hearing and comply with any ICE conditions. Missing a hearing can lead to an order of removal in absentia and loss of the bond. The defenses available in court, such as asylum or cancellation of removal, are covered in our guides on removal defense and removal proceedings, and our longer article Immigration Bond Hearings: How Release From Detention Works walks through the statute in detail. If ICE instead released the person on parole, our parole explainer covers how that differs.

If a family member has been detained, the facts that decide bond — how they entered, any arrests or convictions, and where they are held — need to be looked at quickly. Carlos Maury, a former U.S. Immigration Judge, leads Carlos Maury Law; call (213) 769-0050. Hablamos español.