A federal judge in Denver has ruled that a new policy from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) likely violates federal law by denying bail hearings to long-term, undocumented immigrants. This decision, issued on November 3, 2023, mandates the release of Nestor Gutierrez, who had been held for five months at an ICE detention facility in Aurora, Colorado. The ruling underscores growing judicial resistance to federal immigration policies aimed at restricting the rights of undocumented residents.
U.S. District Court Judge Regina M. Rodriguez determined that Gutierrez and other detainees who have lived in the United States for years are entitled to fair consideration for bail. The ruling prohibits ICE from deporting or transferring Gutierrez and similar immigrants while the lawsuit proceeds. This is significant, as it impacts individuals who historically would have qualified for temporary release during their immigration proceedings.
The context for the ruling centers on a policy implemented earlier this year by the Trump administration. This directive instructed immigration courts to reassess established federal laws, effectively halting bail hearings for certain long-term residents. Critics, including immigration attorneys and advocacy groups, argue this strategy aims to coerce immigrants into abandoning their legal battles or willingly accepting removal.
During recent court proceedings in Aurora, a reporter from the Denver Post observed instances where detainees were pressured to request their own removal. Many had previously sought asylum or expressed fear of returning to their home countries, yet chose to end their fights in hopes of securing release from detention.
The lawsuit was initiated on behalf of Gutierrez, a native of El Salvador who has resided in the Denver area since 1999. Arrested by ICE agents in May, Gutierrez faced a judge who, under the new policy, could not consider bail. This led to his prolonged detention, despite arguments that he posed no flight risk or danger to the community.
In her order, Judge Rodriguez highlighted Gutierrez’s role as his family’s primary financial provider, stating, “What is unique to Mr. Gutierrez, and other noncitizens like him, is that he is being unlawfully detained without bond.” She pointed out that had he been granted a bond hearing, he likely would have received conditional release.
Rodriguez’s ruling also aims to prevent ICE from circumventing the legal process by deporting detainees or relocating them to other facilities where their cases would not be challenged. Following the judge’s order, Gutierrez’s legal team rushed to the detention center, but ICE initially refused to comply. He was ultimately released on November 4, 2023, and will remain free until his bail hearing.
Attorney Hans Meyer, who represents Gutierrez, expressed satisfaction with the ruling, stating, “The most important thing is that the court agreed with us that ICE’s interpretation of the law is incorrect and that people who entered the country without permission, once they’re here, are at least eligible to seek a bond.” Meyer and the ACLU of Colorado filed the lawsuit together, seeking justice for Gutierrez and others in similar circumstances.
This ruling is part of a broader trend across the United States, where courts have increasingly pushed back against federal attempts to deny bail hearings to immigrants. According to Judge Rodriguez, 36 courts nationwide have rejected the reinterpretation of immigration law proposed by senior immigration officials, out of 39 that have reviewed it.
As legal challenges to ICE’s policy continue in Colorado, Meyer and the ACLU are scheduled to return to court in mid-November to pursue class-action status for the lawsuit. Rodriguez has yet to certify the class action, citing the need for more information about how many immigrants share Gutierrez’s situation.
The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for the rights of undocumented immigrants and the policies governing their treatment. Both Meyer and the ACLU aim to have the court declare ICE’s policy unlawful and establish a remedy for those affected.
