Immigration Bond Grants Hit Two-Year High, TRAC Data Show

Immigration judges released more detainees on bond in September than in any month in two years, even as the legal ground under bond hearings keeps shifting in the appeals courts and at the Supreme Court.

Immigration bond grants reached their highest monthly level in two years in September 2026, according to immigration court records compiled by TRAC at Syracuse University. Judges granted bond to 2,646 people that month and held just under 10,000 bond hearings, the most TRAC has recorded, in data the research center published on Oct. 27. The figures matter because they capture the last full month before the full federal appeals court in New Orleans ruled that many detainees in three states have no right to a bond hearing, and while the Supreme Court prepares to decide who is entitled to a hearing at all.

The rise did not come with a smaller detention system. TRAC counted 32,622 people detained at the end of September, barely below the 32,956 at the end of August. Judges still deny more often than they grant: TRAC puts the bond denial rate at 66.0 percent at the close of fiscal 2026, above the previous peak of 65.4 percent in fiscal 2005. Roughly 25 years ago, grants and denials were split about evenly.

Same law, very different price of release

The median bond among people granted release was $7,500, TRAC reported. That national figure hides wide gaps between courts.

Immigration court	Median bond, September 2026	Median bond, fiscal 2026
Denver, Colorado	$20,000	$20,000
Bloomington, Minnesota	$1,500	$3,000

Highest and lowest median bonds among immigration courts. Source: TRAC, Syracuse University, report of Oct. 27, 2026, covering September 2026 and fiscal year 2026 (Oct. 1, 2025, to Sept. 30, 2026).

Based on those TRAC figures, a typical bond in Denver ran more than 13 times the typical bond in Bloomington in September. The Bloomington number has a second meaning. Federal law sets the minimum delivery bond at $1,500, so a September median of exactly $1,500 means at least half the people released there paid the lowest amount the statute allows. In Denver, the typical release costs $20,000, which can decide whether a person granted bond actually walks out. Denver is also where a federal judge weighed sanctioning an immigration judge over a bond-hearing order.

Why more bond grants did not settle the legal fight

Bond under section 236(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act is discretionary, but the fight now is over who gets a hearing at all. Since July 2025, the government has treated people who entered without inspection as applicants for admission subject to mandatory detention, a reading the Board of Immigration Appeals adopted in Matter of Yajure Hurtado. Immigration judges bound by that precedent decline to hold bond hearings for that group.

Federal courts have pushed back in volume. More than 400 federal judges ruled for detainees in more than 5,000 cases after the July 2025 change, according to a Politico analysis cited by The Texas Tribune. Bloomberg Law reported that the federal appeals courts have split 9-2 on the question, with only the Fifth and Eighth Circuits siding with the administration. TRAC’s summary does not explain September’s rise. It fits two channels: people who were lawfully admitted remain eligible under the ordinary rules, and habeas orders have forced hearings for others, a caseload that has swamped the Justice Department’s immigration litigators.

That second channel is now narrower. On Oct. 23 the full Fifth Circuit ruled 10-7 that people who entered illegally have no right to seek bond, a holding that binds federal courts in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, as covered in the report on the full-court ruling. Because the government has moved many detainees to Texas facilities, the decision reaches people arrested elsewhere. October’s figures, when TRAC posts them, will be the first measure of how far grants fall in those courts.

The national answer will come from the Supreme Court. It agreed on Oct. 1 to hear Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, No. 26-104, a Second Circuit case limited to the statutory question. No argument date has been set, and the government asked on Oct. 16 for more time to file. A ruling for the government would likely push bond grants down sharply nationwide; a ruling for detainees would restore hearings in the Fifth and Eighth Circuits and send many more bond requests back to immigration judges.

Dates to track

Supreme Court calendar: an argument date in No. 26-104 and a ruling on the government’s Oct. 16 extension request.
October court data: TRAC’s next monthly update, the first to include weeks after the Fifth Circuit ruling.
Fifth Circuit follow-up: whether the Texas detainees seek Supreme Court review; their lawyers had not decided as of Oct. 23, The Texas Tribune reported.

This article is for general information and is not legal advice.

Sources

Vasanth Vaidyanathan, Esq.

Administrator

Vasanth Vaidyanathan is an immigration attorney with over 20 years of experience focused exclusively on U.S. immigration and nationality law. He holds a LL.M. from California Western School of Law, San Deigo and advises individuals and businesses on employment and family-based immigration matters, including H-1B, PERM, EB categories, and adjustment of status. He has also been a featured speaker at immigration seminars across the U.S. To reach Vasanth visit: https://www.vnathan.com/

Author's website Author's posts