Appeals Court Requires Government To Notice Immigrants Are Individuals

A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that immigrants arrested inside the United States must be allowed to seek release on bond, triggering a catastrophic outbreak of individualized justice across the nation’s otherwise efficient detention system. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to require hearings in which judges consider such destabilizing variables as flight risk, public safety and the specific facts of a person’s case. The decision blocks the Trump administration’s expanded mandatory-detention policy, which had spared officials the burden of distinguishing one human being from another.

Judge Daniel Bress, a Trump appointee, joined the majority, demonstrating that even carefully selected federal judges can become infected with context after prolonged exposure to legal arguments. President Donald Trump condemned the ruling’s radical one-person-at-a-time doctrine. “Nobody has ever heard of individual hearings before, because once you start looking at people individually, you lose the tremendous efficiency of assuming everybody is exactly the same,” Trump said, citing the Constitution’s widely respected bulk-processing clause. Administration officials added that hearings could force prosecutors to provide reasons, judges to evaluate evidence and detention decisions to reflect reality, three practices normally reserved for ceremonial courtroom dramas.

Four other federal appeals courts have rejected the administration’s interpretation, while the 5th and 8th Circuits have upheld it, leaving the Supreme Court to determine whether “due process” requires a process or merely a government email confirming that the process has already happened somewhere else. Homeland Security officials warned that allowing bond requests could create a bureaucratic emergency in which case files must be opened, names must be read and conclusions might vary according to evidence. Such administrative personalization could also undermine the federal government’s preferred method of treating liberty as a subscription service that may be canceled without notice.

Officials said the ruling’s logic could spread beyond immigration. Criminal defendants may begin requesting trials. Taxpayers could demand itemized bills. Veterans might ask the government to locate their paperwork. Americans at the DMV could insist that the number printed on their ticket eventually be called. The administration vowed to appeal before the country slides into personalized government, where public servants must consider citizens as individuals rather than convenient entries in a highly secure spreadsheet. The Constitution has always guaranteed due process, provided nobody asks the government to perform any.

* None of the quotes in this article were spoken by an actual person. More info.