2026年7月3日 美国东部时间凌晨2:48 / 福克斯新闻
这一以2比1通过的裁决可能影响得克萨斯州、路易斯安那州等州被关押的数千名移民
作者：兰登·米恩 福克斯新闻
民主党批评最高法院的移民裁决
首席法律分析师香农·布里姆就最高法院的移民裁决进行分析，该裁决允许特朗普政府驱逐数千名海地移民。
新增功能：你现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/bbe767ba-4db3-4010-8b7b-8151f4a1c5d4
收听本文
3分钟
美国一家上诉法院周四作出裁决，要求美国移民与海关执法局（ICE）在驱逐程序 pending 期间，不得将移民关押超过90天而不给予他们申请保释出狱的机会。
在这份以2比1通过的裁决中，美国第五巡回上诉法院驳回了特朗普政府的主张，这一裁决可能影响到该法院管辖范围内各州（包括得克萨斯州和路易斯安那州）被ICE特工关押的数千名移民。
莱斯利·索思威克法官代表多数方撰写判决意见称，美国最高法院2001年的裁决认定，正当程序条款保护所有人的权利，包括本案中涉及的两名墨西哥公民和一名洪都拉斯公民。
“这份早在建国之初就制定的宪章有着历史性的庄严，它在为我国境内民众提供基本权利时没有任何例外，其中包括当个人自由被剥夺时获得听证的权利，”索思威克写道。
联邦上诉法院维持特朗普针对非法移民的大规模羁押政策
在一份2比1的裁决中，美国第五巡回上诉法院驳回了特朗普政府的主张。（吉姆·沃森 / 法新社 via 盖蒂图片社）
在异议意见中，科里·威尔逊法官表示，多数方判决“淡化了宪法明确赋予国会对移民事务的全权管辖权”。
该法院的另一个合议庭此前曾是全美首个支持政府对联邦移民法的新颖解释的机构，该解释允许对居住在美国境内的非公民实施强制羁押。
不过，今年2月的那项裁决并未涉及美国宪法第五修正案的正当程序保护是否要求移民有机会在移民法官面前申请保释。
美国移民理事会代表移民的律师丽贝卡·卡斯勒在给路透社的一份声明中表示，该组织“对该合议庭认可了核心宪法原则感到高兴，即正当程序条款不允许政府无限期地关押他们”。
该裁决可能影响到被ICE特工在该法院管辖范围内各州关押的数千名移民。（美联社照片/巴勃罗·马丁内斯· Monsivais，资料图）
美国国土安全部在给该媒体的一份声明中表示，其不同意该裁决，并补充称，它“对自己在强制羁押问题上的法律立场充满信心”。
福克斯新闻数字频道已联系该部门征求评论。
上周，特朗普政府曾要求最高法院审查另一家上诉法院作出的类似裁决。
联邦移民法规定，“入境申请者”在移民法院审理案件期间应受强制羁押，因此无资格获得保释听证会。
拜登任命的法官在关键特朗普移民政策上被推翻
美国国土安全部表示不同意该裁决，并补充称，它“对自己在强制羁押问题上的法律立场充满信心”。（美联社照片/瑞安·墨菲，资料图）
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
尽管对移民法有长期的司法解释，国土安全部去年仍主张，已经身处美国境内的非公民也符合“入境申请者”的定义，应受强制羁押，而非仅适用于边境入境人员。
隶属于司法部的移民上诉委员会于去年9月宣布，将采纳国土安全部的这一解释。
该部门下属的移民法官开始在全美范围内下令实施强制羁押。
路透社对本文亦有贡献。
Appeals court blocks Trump admin from holding migrants without bond for over 90 days
July 3, 2026 2:48am EDT / Fox News
The 2-1 decision potentially affects thousands detained in states such as Texas and Louisiana
By Landon Mion Fox News
Democrats criticize Supreme Court’s immigration ruling
Chief legal analyst Shannon Bream analyzes the Supreme Court’s immigration rulings, which allowed the Trump administration to deport thousands of Haitian immigrants.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/bbe767ba-4db3-4010-8b7b-8151f4a1c5d4
Listen to this article
3 min
An appeals court on Thursday ruled that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement cannot detain immigrants for more than 90 days without giving them an opportunity to seek release on bond while their deportation proceedings are pending.
In a 2-1 ruling, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided against the administration, potentially affecting thousands of immigrants who have been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in states within the court ‘s jurisdiction, including Texas and Louisiana.
Judge Leslie Southwick, writing for the majority, said the U.S. Supreme Court found in 2001 that the due process clause protects everyone, including two Mexican citizens and one Honduran whose cases were at issue in this case.
“It is part of the historic majesty of this long-ago founding charter that it makes no exceptions in providing basic rights to those within our boundaries, including a right to be heard when personal liberty is taken,” Southwick wrote.
FEDERAL APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS TRUMP MASS DETENTION POLICY FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
In a 2-1 ruling, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided against the Trump administration.(Jim Watson / AFP via Getty Images)
In a dissenting opinion, Judge Cory Wilson said the majority “marginalizes the Constitution’s express grant of plenary authority over immigration matters to Congress.”
A different panel of the same court had previously been the first in the country to side with the administration’s novel interpretation of a federal immigration statute allowing mandatory detention of non-citizens living in the U.S.
However, that ruling in February did not address whether the due process protections of the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment require giving the immigrants an opportunity to seek release on bond by appearing before an immigration judge.
Rebecca Cassler, a lawyer for the migrants at the American Immigration Council, said in a statement to Reuters that the group is “delighted that the panel recognized the core constitutional principle that the due process clause does not allow the government to lock them away indefinitely.”
The ruling could ahousands of immigrants who have been detained by ICE agents in states within the court ‘s jurisdiction.(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement to the outlet that it disagrees with the ruling, adding that it is “confident in its legal position regarding mandatory detention.”
Fox News Digital reached out to the department for comment.
Last week, the administration had asked the Supreme Court to review a similar ruling by a different appeals court.
Federal immigration law states that “applicants for admission” to the country are subject to mandatory detention while their cases proceed in immigration courts, making them ineligible for bond hearings.
BIDEN JUDGE OVERRULED ON KEY TRUMP IMMIGRATION POLICY
The Department of Homeland Security said it disagrees with the ruling, adding that it is “confident in its legal position regarding mandatory detention.”((AP Photo/Ryan Murphy, File)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Despite a long-standing interpretation of immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security claimed last year that non-citizens who are already in the U.S. qualify as “applicants for admission” subject to mandatory detention, rather than only people arriving at the border.
The Board of Immigration Appeals, which is part of the Justice Department, announced in September that it had adopted the Department of Homeland Security’s interpretation.
Immigration judges employed by the department began ordering mandatory detention across the country.
Reuters contributed to this report.