top of page

Immigration Removal Proceedings and Expanded Mandatory Detention in the U.S.

  • Writer: Behkar Law
    Behkar Law
  • Jun 25, 2025
  • 3 min read

As of June 24, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was holding more than 59,000 people in immigration detention—the highest number ever recorded. This exceeds the federally funded capacity of 41,500 beds by 140%.


Data shows that nearly half of detained individuals (47%) had no criminal record, and fewer than 30% had any criminal convictions. While ICE deported approximately 70,000 individuals with criminal convictions between January and June, many of those convictions involved immigration or traffic-related offenses, rather than serious crimes.


On July 4, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA) into law. The legislation provides $45 billion over four years to expand immigration detention, including family detention centers. This funding will allow ICE to increase capacity to at least 116,000 beds, more than double current levels.


At the same time, ICE has significantly limited the use of bond and release during removal proceedings, meaning more individuals will remain detained for longer periods.


Removal proceedings begin after ICE issues a Notice to Appear (NTA). Most cases include:

  • A Master Calendar Hearing, where charges are reviewed and relief options are identified

  • A possible bond hearing, if the individual requests one and is eligible

  • An individual merits hearing, where the judge decides whether the person can remain in the U.S.

Cases move much faster for individuals in detention than for those released on bond, though detention does not increase the likelihood of winning a case.


A Master Calendar Hearing is the first court appearance. The judge reviews charges, explains rights, and sets deadlines. No evidence is presented at this stage, and removal orders are rarely issued unless the person fails to appear. Studies show most individuals attend their hearings, especially when represented by counsel.


Bond hearings are the primary way detained individuals may be released while their cases are pending. Judges determine whether a person is eligible for bond based on danger to the community, flight risk, and eligibility under the law.

Certain individuals are not eligible for bond, including those with prior removal orders, aggravated felony convictions, or final denials of relief.


Despite recent restrictions, bond hearings have still resulted in releases, including for longtime residents and DACA recipients detained after minor traffic stops.


  • Detained docket: Faster-moving cases, hearings scheduled within weeks or months

  • Non-detained docket: Slower, often taking years to resolve


If bond is denied or unavailable, individuals remain detained throughout proceedings.


At the individual hearing, immigrants present their case for relief, such as asylum, cancellation of removal, or adjustment of status. As of mid-2025, immigration judges ordered removal or voluntary departure in about 50% of cases reaching this stage.


A July 8 ICE memo instructed officers to detain individuals for the entire duration of removal proceedings, relying on a reinterpretation of immigration laws from the 1990s. Under this policy, individuals who entered the U.S. without inspection even many years ago—may be classified as “arriving aliens” and denied bond hearings.

Release may still occur in rare cases through parole, but decisions are made by ICE officers rather than immigration judges.


Immigration attorneys report that judges are increasingly denying or refusing to consider bond requests, and legal challenges to this policy are ongoing.


These policies are expected to:

  • Increase long-term immigration detention

  • Reduce access to bond hearings

  • Delay court proceedings due to overcrowding

  • Impact individuals with strong family and community ties

If you or a loved one is detained or facing removal proceedings, legal representation is critical. Bond eligibility, detention challenges, and relief options are highly fact-specific and continue to evolve.

 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page