Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock

On July 30, 2026, a divided Ninth Circuit panel affirmed, ruling for the detainees. In an opinion by Judge Bress, the panel held that noncitizens present without admission who are apprehended in the interior of the United States are not subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. section 1225(b)(2)(A); that provision reaches those seeking admission at the border or a port of entry, while interior arrestees remain eligible for bond hearings under section 1226(a). The court grounded its reading in the statutory text and structure, the INA's definition of 'admission,' and the Supreme Court's treatment of the detention scheme in Jennings v. Rodriguez, and it found the government's contrary reading created surplusage and conflicted with circuit precedent. Judge McKeown joined the majority; Judge Bea dissented. The panel noted the decision deepens an existing split, with the Fifth and Eighth Circuits siding with the government and the Second, Sixth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits siding with detainees, a division that makes the question a strong candidate for Supreme Court review. Because the ruling affirms class-wide summary judgment, class members apprehended in the interior are entitled to individualized bond hearings rather than automatic detention.