Kyle Cheney in Politico reports on a nationwide judicial revolt against the Trump administration’s policy mandating detention for nearly all immigrants in deportation proceedings. In July, DHS aggressively expanded the conditions under which persons can be detained for violating immigration laws. Over 700 emergency challenges have entered federal courts, with at least 225 judges in 35 states,  including many Trump appointees,  finding the policy likely unlawful and a breach of due process. Only eight judges have sided with the administration.

Per Cheney, at the core of the legal fight is the administration’s reading of the term “seeking admission.” That phrase used to apply mainly to newly arrived migrants at the border. DHS now claims that millions of long-settled immigrants, even those here for decades with citizen families and pending legal claims for normalization of status, still count as “seeking admission” and can therefore be detained without bond. New class actions and appellate rulings, sought by district courts, may soon determine the policy’s fate.

The expansion of definition was made in an internal July 8 memo the full contents of which are apparently not public. It appears to have said the pretty much all persons who “have not been admitted” (regardless of any knowledge or how arrived, or when) are subject to mandatory detention and can be released only through a formal act of granting parole.

Here is a New Jersey court case involving the expanded definition.