Federal judges have delivered ICE detention orders over 1,200 times since February despite an appeals court ruling that appeared to hand the Trump administration a decisive victory on immigration enforcement policy.

Constitutional Route Sidesteps Legal Defeat

After the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals endorsed ICE’s detention policy on February 6, judges throughout Texas and Louisiana discovered an alternative path to challenge the administration. Rather than attacking the policy as illegal, which the appeals court prohibited, district judges ruled ICE violated detainees’ constitutional due process rights. This separate constitutional claim represents nearly 60 percent of all immigration detention rulings in the circuit since the February decision, according to a detailed analysis of court records.

The 5th Circuit now faces whether ICE detainees under mandatory detention policies deserve the constitutional protections these district judges consistently affirm. Judges appointed by every president since Ronald Reagan have joined this majority opposition, creating a clear pattern across political lines. The Trump administration’s win rate improved from under 10 percent to roughly one-third of cases, but still falls far short of establishing widespread judicial support.

Nationwide Policy Sparks Legal Firestorm

The administration expanded mandatory detention policies last July, fundamentally changing decades of ICE practice. Previous administrations primarily detained recent border crossers, but current policy treats anyone encountered inside the country as though they just arrived, regardless of decades-long U.S. residency or established community ties. This shift triggered over 15,100 emergency lawsuits nationwide, with courts ruling against ICE in more than 13,300 cases. The 5th Circuit handles approximately one-fifth of all ICE detention rulings recorded over the past eleven months.

Two judges emerged as outliers supporting the administration. U.S. District Judge Leon Schydlower, appointed by President Biden, rejected release petitions over 150 times since February. U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr., a Trump appointee, similarly ruled against detainees more than 60 times. Their decisions represent a small fraction of the circuit’s overall pattern.

Appeals Courts Remain Divided

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals followed the 5th Circuit’s lead in March, upholding the administration’s detention approach for Midwest states including Minnesota. However, three other appeals courts covering Florida, New York, and Ohio rejected the policy entirely. This circuit split creates inconsistent immigration enforcement standards across the nation, with detainees’ rights depending heavily on geographic location. The constitutional due process argument provides district judges a powerful tool to protect individual rights while technically complying with binding appeals court precedent on statutory interpretation.