WASHINGTON (Diya TV) — U.S. federal courts across several states have ruled against Immigration and Customs Enforcement in a series of recent cases involving Indian nationals. Judges found that ICE unlawfully detained the individuals without bond hearings or basic due process protections required under federal law. The decisions mark a growing judicial pushback against detention practices that courts say violate constitutional rights.
In rulings issued this month in California, Michigan, Texas, and Pennsylvania, federal judges ordered the release of Indian citizens or directed ICE to provide prompt bond hearings. The courts rejected the government’s use of mandatory detention rules for people who were already living in the United States.
Judges said ICE wrongly applied a statute meant for “arriving noncitizens” to individuals who had entered the country earlier and lived in U.S. communities. Under immigration law, individuals typically qualify for bond hearings while their cases are pending. The cases involve Indian nationals who sought asylum, complied with reporting rules, and worked legally while awaiting immigration decisions.
In Michigan, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan granted habeas relief to Varun, an Indian citizen held at the North Lake Processing Center. The court ruled that ICE unlawfully detained him under mandatory detention rules that did not apply to his situation.
Varun entered the United States in April 2023. Authorities released him on his own recognizance. He later applied for asylum and lived in California. ICE arrested him in December 2025 while he worked as a truck driver. The judge ordered ICE to provide Varun with a bond hearing within five business days or release him. The court said his continued detention without a hearing violated due process.
In a separate case, the same court granted similar relief to Sumit Tulsibhai Patel, another Indian national detained at the same facility. Patel entered the United States in 2021 and secured release on bond. ICE re-arrested him in 2025. The judge ruled that ICE again misapplied the mandatory detention law. The court ordered a bond hearing or release and warned that the detention raised serious constitutional concerns.
In Pennsylvania, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordered the immediate release of Amit Kanaut. ICE detained Kanaut during a routine check-in in December 2025. Kanaut entered the United States in 2022. He followed ICE reporting requirements, worked legally, and pursued an asylum claim. The government argued that Kanaut qualified as an applicant for admission and faced a subject totory detention.
The judge rejected that claim. The court noted that Kanaut had lived in the United States for nearly three years. Detaining him without a bond hearing, the judge said, offended due process and violated the Constitution.
Across the cases, judges criticized a recent government policy that directs ICE to treat many undocumented immigrants as subject to mandatory detention. Courts said the policy ignores key distinctions in immigration law.
Judges stressed that people already living in the United States fall under a different legal provision. That section allows immigration judges to consider release on bond based on flight risk and public safety. The courts also emphasized that noncitizens who receive parole or bond have a protected liberty interest. Judges said ICE cannot revoke release without notice, clear reasons, and an opportunity to be heard.
Legal experts say the rulings add to a growing body of decisions limiting ICE detention authority. Courts across the country have increasingly demanded stronger due process protections in immigration cases. The decisions reinforce that immigration enforcement must follow constitutional standards. That requirement applies regardless of nationality, including Indian nationals seeking asylum.
For many immigrants, the rulings provide relief from prolonged detention and uncertainty. They also signal that federal courts remain willing to intervene when agencies overstep legal bounds. As more cases reach the courts, the debate over ICE detention practices and mandatory detention policy is likely to continue. Judges have made one point clear: due process remains a core protection under U.S. law, even in immigration enforcement.
