Recent Case Highlights the Limits of Bond Hearings
Navigating the immigration system is never simple, and recent legal rulings continue to shape the rights and options available to those facing detention. At Mathur Law Offices, P.C., a Dallas-based immigration law firm, our attorneys closely follow these developments to provide the most informed representation possible.
In September 2025, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a precedential decision in Matter of Jonathan Javier Yajure Hurtado. This case reaffirmed that Immigration Judges lack the authority to grant bond to certain individuals in immigration detention. Specifically, the ruling emphasized that anyone present in the United States without lawful admission is subject to mandatory detention requirements under section 235(b)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
For individuals and families navigating the complex immigration system, this decision underscores the importance of working with a knowledgeable Immigration Appeals Attorney who can guide them through their legal options when detention or removal proceedings are at stake.
What the Court Decided
The respondent, a Venezuelan national, entered the United States without inspection in 2022 and later applied for bond after being placed in removal proceedings.
Both the Immigration Judge and the BIA determined that he was ineligible for a bond hearing because:
He was considered an “applicant for admission” under the INA, since he entered without inspection or lawful admission.
Section 235(b)(2)(A) of the INA requires that such individuals be detained for the duration of their removal proceedings.
Immigration Judges have no jurisdiction to grant bond in these cases.
The BIA also dismissed the respondent’s arguments that his lengthy residence in the U.S. or prior practices by the Department of Homeland Security entitled him to a bond hearing. The decision reinforced Congress’s intent to prevent individuals who enter unlawfully from having more procedural rights than those who lawfully present themselves at ports of entry
Mandatory Detention Explained
Under U.S. immigration law, mandatory detention applies to individuals who:
Enter the country without inspection or admission.
Are classified as “applicants for admission” under INA section 235(a)(1).
Fail to demonstrate they are “clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to admission.”
In these cases, release on bond is not an option. The law requires detention until the conclusion of removal proceedings, leaving immigration bond request attorneys unable to seek relief through bond hearings.
Why This Matters for Families and Individuals
The Yajure Hurtado case highlights several important realities for those facing immigration detention:
No Bond Authority - Even if someone has lived in the U.S. for years, Immigration Judges cannot grant bond if the individual entered without lawful inspection.
Legislative Intent - Congress specifically closed loopholes in 1996 to ensure that unlawful entrants would not gain greater rights than those who attempted legal entry.
Limited Alternatives - While Immigration Judges cannot grant bond, the Department of Homeland Security retains discretion to grant parole in specific circumstances, such as humanitarian needs.
How an Immigration Attorney Can Help
Facing detention or removal is an overwhelming experience.
A skilled immigration attorney can provide crucial assistance by:
Reviewing your case to determine whether detention is mandatory or if parole options may be available.
Filing appeals and motions to challenge errors in legal interpretation or procedure.
Advocating for relief such as asylum, cancellation of removal, or adjustment of status where applicable.
Ensuring your rights are protected throughout the process.
For families, understanding the difference between mandatory detention and discretionary detention is essential. While not every case allows for bond hearings, an attorney can identify the best possible legal path forward.
The Role of an Immigration Appeals Attorney
When an Immigration Judge denies bond or issues an unfavorable ruling, the appeals process becomes critical.
An immigration appeals attorney can:
Prepare detailed legal arguments addressing statutory interpretation and legislative history.
File appeals with the BIA and, if necessary, pursue judicial review in federal courts.
Highlight errors in law or procedure that could change the outcome of a case.
In complex cases like Matter of Yajure Hurtado, appeals attorneys play a vital role in ensuring that evolving immigration law is applied fairly and consistently.
Contact Mathur Law Offices, P.C. Today
The recent BIA decision reaffirms that individuals who enter the United States without lawful admission are subject to mandatory detention, with no opportunity for bond hearings before an Immigration Judge. For anyone impacted by these rules, having an experienced immigration bond request attorney or immigration appeals attorney is essential.
At Mathur Law Offices, P.C., our Dallas-based team has decades of experience representing clients in family law, criminal defense, and immigration matters. We understand the challenges of immigration detention and are committed to guiding our clients through every stage of the process with knowledge, compassion, and strong legal advocacy.
Schedule a consultation with us by reaching out online or calling (888) 867-5191 today.