Updated August 5, 2026
Many people with detained relatives ask us whether their loved one might be eligible for a bond. In this article we explain what that eligibility depends on, what has changed over the past year, and why the answer today may be different depending on the state where the person is detained.
In Brief
- An immigration bond is the financial guarantee that allows a person detained by ICE to be released while their case moves forward in immigration court. The statutory minimum amount is $1,500 (INA § 236(a)(2)(A)).
- The person requesting the bond must primarily demonstrate two things: that they are not a danger to the community and that they will not flee from immigration authorities, meaning they will appear at every hearing.
- Jurisdiction is decisive today. Since 2025, the federal government has taken the position that people who entered without inspection are “applicants for admission” and therefore have no right to request bond before a judge. The federal courts of appeals are divided on this point.
- As of July 30, 2026, five courts of appeals had rejected that interpretation and two had upheld it, according to the Associated Press.
- Florida sits in the Eleventh Circuit, which on May 6, 2026 confirmed that people detained in the interior of the country may request bond under INA § 236(a) (Alvarez v. Warden, Federal Detention Center Miami, No. 25-14065).
- In Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi (Fifth Circuit), the opposite rule has applied since February 6, 2026 (Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, No. 25-20496).
- There are also mandatory detention categories in which the law does not allow bond at all, regardless of jurisdiction.
What is an immigration bond, and who decides whether it is granted?
An immigration bond is the deposit that allows a person detained by ICE to be released while awaiting the outcome of their case in immigration court. When the person is eligible, an immigration judge, not ICE, sets the amount and the conditions. Federal law sets a $1,500 minimum.
It is important to understand that a bond does not resolve the immigration case. The person remains in proceedings before the court and must appear at every hearing. The bond simply allows them to wait out that process at home with their family rather than in detention.
Who is eligible for an immigration bond?
Generally, a person is eligible if they are held under discretionary detention authority (INA § 236(a)), do not fall into a mandatory detention category, and can show the judge that they are neither a danger to the community nor a flight risk. The jurisdiction where they are detained also has a decisive influence.
Put simply, eligibility is analyzed on three levels:
- Does the law allow bond in this case? This is where mandatory detention and the current dispute over people who entered without inspection come in.
- Where is the person detained? The federal circuit covering that state determines which interpretation applies today.
- Can they prove the two requirements? That they are not a danger to the community and that they will not flee from the authorities.
Important: the burden of proof falls on the detained person, not on the government.
What two things must be proven to obtain a bond?
The detained person must show they are not a danger to the community or to national security, and that they are likely to appear at all their hearings. This is set out in the federal regulation (8 CFR § 1236.1(c)(8)) and developed in the decision Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2006).
In practice, the judge weighs the person’s overall situation: their ties to the community, their record, their conduct, and whether they have a genuine immigration case for which to appear in court. That is why we place so much emphasis on maintaining good moral conduct and on having clarity about what form of legal relief will be requested.
Note: each judge evaluates the full set of circumstances. There is no single formula and no guaranteed outcome, and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) tightened how flight risk is assessed during 2025 and 2026. This is why it is essential for an attorney to review the specific case before the hearing.
Who is NOT eligible for an immigration bond?
People subject to mandatory detention under INA § 236(c), which covers certain criminal convictions and security grounds, are not eligible. Neither are people in expedited removal proceedings or with a final order of removal, which are governed by different rules. In those cases the judge has no authority to set bond.
Since 2025, the federal government’s position that people who entered without inspection must remain detained under INA § 235(b)(2)(A) with no access to bond has been added to those categories. That is precisely the point now divided in the courts.
Why does jurisdiction change the outcome of a bond request?
Because the federal courts of appeals have not agreed. Each circuit covers a group of states, and its decisions are binding only within that territory. As a result, two people with nearly identical cases can receive opposite answers: one may request bond in Florida while the other cannot in Texas.
This is the verified status of the circuits that have already ruled on whether people who entered without inspection may request bond:
| Circuit | States covered | Case and date | Bond available? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Second | New York, Connecticut, Vermont | Barbosa Da Cunha v. Freden, No. 25-3141 | Yes, under INA § 236(a) |
| Fifth | Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi | Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, No. 25-20496 (February 6, 2026) | No; mandatory detention |
| Sixth | Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee | Lopez-Campos v. Raycraft, No. 25-1965 | Yes, under INA § 236 |
| Eighth | Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North and South Dakota | Avila v. Bondi, No. 25-3248 | No; mandatory detention |
| Ninth | California, Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, Hawaii | Decision of July 30, 2026 | Yes |
| Eleventh | Florida, Georgia, Alabama | Alvarez v. Warden, Federal Detention Center Miami, No. 25-14065 (May 6, 2026) | Yes, under INA § 236(a) |
The First, Third, Fourth, Seventh and Tenth Circuits had already heard oral argument and their decisions were pending at the time of publication. This can change at any moment, which is why we recommend verifying the current state of the law before making any decision.
What did the Eleventh Circuit say about bonds in Florida?
On May 6, 2026, the Eleventh Circuit held that people who entered without inspection and were detained in the interior of the country are covered by INA § 236(a) and may request a bond hearing. The court reasoned that these individuals “were not seeking lawful entry after inspection and authorization by an immigration officer” at the time they were detained.
This decision applies to Florida, Georgia and Alabama. For families in South Florida, this is encouraging news: it keeps the door to a bond hearing before an immigration judge open.
What changed in the bond rules since 2025?
In July 2025 the federal government reclassified people who entered without inspection as “applicants for admission,” eliminating their access to bond. The BIA endorsed that reading in September 2025, and since then federal district and appellate courts have issued decisions in both directions.
| Date | What happened | Source |
|---|---|---|
| July 2025 | ICE issues an internal memorandum eliminating bond for people considered “applicants for admission.” | Immigration Policy Tracking Project |
| September 5, 2025 | The BIA decides Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025), adopting that broad interpretation. | Department of Justice (EOIR) |
| February 6, 2026 | The Fifth Circuit upholds mandatory detention (Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi). | American Immigration Council |
| February 18, 2026 | A federal district court in California (Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes) vacates Yajure Hurtado in the Maldonado Bautista case. | National Immigration Law Center (NILC) |
| March 6, 2026 | A government appeal puts that protection on hold outside the Central District of California. | NILC |
| May 6, 2026 | The Eleventh Circuit confirms bond eligibility in Florida, Georgia and Alabama (Alvarez v. Warden). | Eleventh Circuit |
| June 15, 2026 | The Supreme Court agrees to review Genalo v. Black, on whether prolonged detention under INA § 236(c) requires a bond hearing. | Legal press reports |
| July 30, 2026 | The Ninth Circuit rejects the expansion of mandatory detention. Judge Bress wrote: “Although no reading of the complicated and interrelated textual provisions at issue here is without some shortcomings, the historical understanding of the statute is the better one.” | Associated Press |
Caution: this is a moving landscape. A Supreme Court decision could unify the standard nationwide. What is valid in your state today may change in the coming months.
What can the family of a detained person do?
The first thing is not to act on your own or based on what worked for another family. Every case depends on the person’s immigration history, their record, where they are detained, and what form of legal relief they may request. We recommend scheduling a consultation so the attorney can review the specific situation.
Time matters in these cases, which is why our firm also offers emergency consultations, scheduled sooner than regular ones and at a higher cost. Our consultations are not free, but they allow attorney Jesús Reyes to review the case thoroughly and tell you honestly what legal alternatives exist.
Frequently Asked Questions About Immigration Bonds
How much does an immigration bond cost?
Federal law sets a $1,500 minimum (INA § 236(a)(2)(A)). The exact amount is determined by the immigration judge based on the circumstances of the case, and in practice it is usually higher than that minimum.
Can someone who crossed the border request a bond?
It depends on the state where they are detained. In Florida, Georgia and Alabama, the Eleventh Circuit confirmed on May 6, 2026 that they can. In Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, the Fifth Circuit held the opposite. Reviewing the case with an attorney is essential.
Does a criminal conviction prevent obtaining a bond?
Certain convictions trigger mandatory detention under INA § 236(c), and in those cases the judge cannot set bond. Not every conviction has that effect. Only an analysis of the specific record can determine this.
Who has to prove that the person deserves the bond?
The burden falls on the detained person, who must persuade the judge that they are not a danger to the community and that they will appear at their hearings.
If bond is denied, is the case over?
No. A bond denial does not decide the merits of the case, and avenues for review exist. Which ones apply depends on each situation, and this is a point that should be evaluated with an attorney.
Does release on bond mean the person will not be deported?
No. A bond only allows the person to wait out the process in freedom. The case continues in immigration court and the person must appear at every hearing.
Conclusion
Eligibility for an immigration bond depends on the law, on jurisdiction, and on what the person can demonstrate to the judge. That combination is more complex today than it was a year ago, but for families in Florida the door remains open, and legal paths worth exploring still exist across the country.
If you have a detained relative, or questions about a bond case, litigation, or any immigration matter, contact us. We handle cases worldwide from our office in Miami, Florida, and we are here to advise you and review your specific case.
See also our frequently asked questions, our services, and the testimonials of people we have accompanied.
Sources Consulted
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit — Alvarez v. Warden, Federal Detention Center Miami, No. 25-14065 (May 6, 2026)
- U.S. Department of Justice, Board of Immigration Appeals — Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025)
- U.S. Department of Justice, Board of Immigration Appeals — Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2006)
- Legal Information Institute, Cornell University — 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (INA § 236), detention and bond
- Legal Information Institute, Cornell University — 8 CFR § 1236.1, bond requirements
- American Immigration Council — BIA Decision Strips Immigration Judges of Bond Authority
- American Immigration Council — Defending the Constitutional Right of Longtime Residents to Challenge Their Detention
- National Immigration Law Center (NILC) — Rapid Response Update on Bond Eligibility for Undocumented Immigrants
- National Immigration Forum — Reclassifying “Applicants for Admission”
- Immigration Policy Tracking Project (Stanford Law School) — ICE issues memo eliminating bond for all applicants for admission
- Associated Press — Appeals court rejects the expansion of mandatory detention for immigrants (July 30, 2026)
