A wave of habeas corpus petitions has flooded Michigan’s U.S. District Courts, primarily from individuals detained at the North Lake Processing Center. Judges have largely granted these petitions since January 2025, compelling the government to provide bond hearings or release immigrants, a move the Trump administration criticizes as “rogue” judicial action. This surge in filings stems from a policy shift allowing mandatory detention for immigrants without legal status, challenging established due process rights and sparking legal battles over the interpretation of immigration law. The outcomes of these cases are increasingly impactful, with some individuals granted release or bond, while others, despite winning their petitions, remain detained due to being deemed flight risks.
Read More
A federal appeals court has upheld a Trump administration immigration policy that ends bond eligibility for individuals detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who entered the country without inspection. This policy instructs ICE agents to deny bond for such individuals, detaining them for the duration of their removal proceedings unless granted parole. The ruling by a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit determined that the government’s interpretation of the law is correct, allowing for this mandatory detention. This decision contradicts the stance of numerous lower court judges and immigrant advocates, who argue the policy misinterprets statutes and departs from historical precedent.
Read More
Texas Representative Nicole Collier filed a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that her confinement in the state Capitol by the Republican majority is unlawful. Collier, along with other Democrats, had previously left the state to block the enactment of new congressional maps. House Speaker Dustin Burrows, a Republican, subsequently required Democratic legislators to sign a form agreeing to 24-hour police surveillance, which Collier refused to do. Collier’s lawsuit contends that the legislature lacks the power to detain a lawmaker based on concerns about future absences, thus making her confinement illegal.
Read More
The Library of Congress’s online copy of the U.S. Constitution was briefly modified to remove the section guaranteeing the right to challenge detention, coinciding with the Trump administration’s consideration of suspending habeas corpus. Government officials attributed the deletion to a technical “glitch,” prompting internal review and correction. The timing of the error raised suspicion, given the administration’s efforts to undermine constitutional rights and Trump’s ongoing attempt to control the Library of Congress. The deleted sections have since been restored, and the Library of Congress has stated it was due to a “coding error”.
Read More
Recently, several sections of Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution were found to be missing from the official U.S. government website, as discovered by internet users and confirmed by TechCrunch. The Wayback Machine indicates these changes occurred within the last month, with Section 8 partially removed and Sections 9 and 10 entirely deleted. These missing sections detail the powers of Congress, limitations on state authority, and protections for citizens, including those related to habeas corpus. According to the Library of Congress, the omissions are due to a “coding error” and will be rectified soon; however, the White House has declined to comment further.
Read More
The official congressional website, congress.gov, has removed Sections 9 and 10 of Article I from its “Constitution Annotated” resource, raising concerns about the integrity of the document. Section 9, which includes the right to habeas corpus, has been deleted, along with other constitutional protections. This act mirrors former President Trump’s past actions, where he edited out parts of the Constitution that didn’t align with his views, showcasing an assault on the rule of law. This act is a bold step, laying the groundwork for misinformation and making it easier to disregard fundamental rights, despite the law itself remaining unchanged.
Read More
The Department of Justice has launched an unusual lawsuit against the entire U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, citing the court’s order to temporarily pause deportations for individual migrant habeas petitions. The DOJ argues this order overreaches judicial authority and undermines the executive branch’s immigration enforcement priorities. This action is a response to a case that began in May and followed the deportation of a Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, which the DOJ has called an “administrative error.” The case, which is being defended by noted conservative lawyer Paul Clement, has been moved out of Maryland and is likely to be appealed to higher courts.
Read More
A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to return hundreds of Venezuelan nationals deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison. The judge ruled that the deportations, conducted under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act without individual judicial review, violated due process rights. While the Supreme Court vacated a prior injunction halting the deportations, it affirmed the right to individual habeas corpus petitions. The judge deemed the situation “Kafkaesque,” citing evidence suggesting many detainees lacked gang ties and were imprisoned based on flimsy accusations. The ruling mandates the return of the Venezuelans to the U.S. to challenge their deportations.
Read More
Kristi Noem, during a Senate hearing, incorrectly defined habeas corpus, claiming it allows the president to remove people from the country and suspend their rights. Senator Hassan corrected her, explaining its true meaning as a protection against unlawful detention. Noem’s unfazed response and subsequent insistence on the president’s authority to suspend it suggests a calculated performance rather than genuine ignorance. This aligns with the MAGA archetype of the “bimbo”—a woman who prioritizes loyalty and aggressive defense of the party line over intellect, deflecting criticism with feigned stupidity. This calculated performance effectively shields her from accountability for her actions.
Read More
During a Senate hearing, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem incorrectly defined habeas corpus as the president’s right to deport individuals, rather than the right of detained persons to challenge their detention. This misunderstanding occurred as the Trump administration considers suspending habeas corpus for immigrants facing deportation. Senator Hassan’s question regarding the definition of habeas corpus prompted Noem’s inaccurate response. Noem’s answer highlights a significant gap in understanding of fundamental legal rights amidst discussions of mass deportations.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker