Immigration Bond Hearings in Illinois: What to Know in 2026

Immigration · 16 October 2026

A phone call from a detention center, or a relative who did not come home from work: when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detains someone, the family’s first question is usually whether that person can come home while the immigration case goes on. For many people, the answer runs through a bond hearing. In 2026 it has also become one of the most contested questions in immigration law, so this guide explains both how bond works and what has changed. It is current as of 16 October 2026.

First, find out where the person is being held

ICE’s Online Detainee Locator System searches for people currently in ICE custody. ICE recommends searching by A-Number, the nine-digit number on the person’s immigration paperwork, together with their country of birth. The locator cannot search for anyone under 18.

Location matters for more than visiting. A request for a bond hearing goes to the immigration court with jurisdiction over the place of detention (8 CFR 1003.19(c)). And someone picked up in the Chicago area is not always held in Illinois: in the Seventh Circuit case discussed below, a man in the custody of ICE’s Chicago Field Office was held at the Dodge County Jail in Wisconsin.

Two decisions: ICE’s first, then a judge’s

After an arrest, ICE makes the first custody decision. For people held under the general detention statute, 8 U.S.C. 1226(a), the government can keep them in custody, release them on a bond of at least $1,500, or release them on conditional parole. The $1,500 figure is the minimum the statute allows, not a typical amount; the bond set in a real case is a separate question.

If ICE sets no bond, or a bond the family cannot meet, the detained person can ask an immigration judge to review the decision. The regulation calls this a custody redetermination, and the request can be made orally, in writing or, if the judge allows it, by telephone (8 CFR 1003.19(b)).

The bond hearing is separate from the removal case itself. The regulation says bond proceedings are separate from, and form no part of, the removal hearing (8 CFR 1003.19(d)). Being released on bond does not decide whether the person can stay in the United States, and being denied bond does not decide it either.

If things change after a decision, a new request is possible, but it must be in writing and the judge will consider it only if circumstances have changed materially since the last bond decision (8 CFR 1003.19(e)).

What the immigration judge weighs

Before a judge can order release under 1226(a), the detained person has to show three things: that they are not a danger to people or property, that they are not a threat to national security, and that they are likely to appear for future proceedings. The burden is on the detained person, not on the government (Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2006); Matter of Adeniji, 22 I&N Dec. 1102 (BIA 1999)).

Beyond that threshold, judges have broad discretion. The factors listed in the immigration courts’ own bench outline on bond include:

• a fixed address in the United States
• how long the person has lived here
• family ties in the United States, especially relatives who could help the person obtain lawful status
• employment history, including how long and how stable it has been
• the person’s immigration record, including any past failure to appear for a hearing
• any attempt to escape from authorities or to avoid prosecution
• any criminal record, including how extensive and how recent it is

The same outline notes that the ability to pay is not decisive. In practice, the evidence that matters is the evidence that speaks to those factors: proof of where the person lives and for how long, letters from employers and family, birth or naturalization certificates of U.S. citizen relatives, and certified records showing how any arrest or charge was resolved. A judge can only weigh what is in front of them, so families who gather these papers early give the lawyer something to work with.

When there is no bond hearing at all: mandatory detention

Some people are subject to mandatory detention, and an immigration judge cannot set bond for them. Under 8 U.S.C. 1226(c), that includes people who are inadmissible or deportable on certain criminal grounds and on terrorism-related grounds. The categories turn on the exact offense and, for some, the sentence, so whether a particular record falls inside one is a legal question to have answered, not something to guess at.

In January 2025, Congress added a new category in the Laken Riley Act (Public Law 119-1). It covers people who are inadmissible because they are present without admission or parole, because of fraud or misrepresentation, or because they lack valid entry documents, and who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admit to acts that are the essential elements of burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault of a law enforcement officer, or a crime that results in death or serious bodily injury to another person. Notice the words “charged with” and “arrested for”: under this provision, a conviction is not required.

The regulations also bar immigration judges from redetermining custody for “arriving aliens” in removal proceedings (8 CFR 1003.19(h)(2)). For people held under 1226(c), the same regulation preserves one important step: the person can ask the immigration judge to decide that they are not properly included in that mandatory category at all.

The 2026 question: people who entered without inspection

For decades, a person who entered the United States without inspection, lived here, and was later arrested inside the country was detained under 1226(a) and could ask an immigration judge for bond. In 2025 the Department of Homeland Security took a new position: that these people are “applicants for admission” who must be detained without bond under a different provision, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(2)(A). The Board of Immigration Appeals agreed in Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025), holding that immigration judges lack authority to hear bond requests from people present without admission.

Federal courts have pushed back, and they have split. For Illinois, the controlling decision is the Seventh Circuit’s ruling of July 30, 2026 in Cirrus Rojas v. Olson, No. 25-3127. The court held that a man who had entered without inspection and lived here since 2018 was not “seeking admission,” was therefore not subject to mandatory detention under 1225(b)(2)(A), and was eligible for a bond hearing under 1226(a). One of the three judges dissented. The Seventh Circuit covers Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin.

That opinion also records where other appeals courts stood: the Second, Sixth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits had rejected the government’s reading, while the Fifth and Eighth Circuits had adopted it. On October 1, 2026, the Supreme Court agreed to decide the question in Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, No. 26-104: whether 1225(b)(2)(A) requires detention during removal proceedings of people who are present in the United States without having been admitted. Until the Court rules, the answer can depend on where in the country a person is held, and detained people are not always held in the state where they were arrested.

Two practical points follow. First, even in the Seventh Circuit the path has not been simple: Mr. Cirrus Rojas got his result through a federal habeas corpus petition, after the government refused to release him despite an immigration judge’s bond order. Second, the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case did not by itself change anyone’s custody. Anyone in this situation needs advice on the law as it stands on the day the advice is given.

If bond is granted: paying it, and what it means

ICE takes immigration bonds through its online system, CeBONDS. According to ICE, payment must be made by Fedwire or ACH, the full bond amount must be deposited when the bond is posted, and bonds are processed Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., in the time zone where the person is detained. The person who posts the bond, called the obligor, can be a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident, a law firm or a nonprofit organization, and must provide qualifying identity documents. The contract is Form I-352, which ICE describes as the only document that sets out the bond’s terms and conditions.

A bond is a promise as well as a payment. It stays in effect until ICE cancels it on Form I-391, and the money is refunded after cancellation. If the bond is breached, for example because the person does not appear when required, the deposit is forfeited.

Release does not always follow the judge’s order immediately. If ICE had decided the person should not be released, or had set a bond of $10,000 or more, DHS can file a notice of intent to appeal within one business day of the judge’s order, and that filing automatically stays the release while the appeal is pending, subject to time limits in the regulations (8 CFR 1003.19(i)(2)).

Either side can appeal a bond decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals. EOIR’s own guidance gives the deadline as 30 calendar days after the judge’s oral decision or the mailing of a written one, and the notice of appeal must reach the Board within that time. A February 2026 rule that would have cut most appeal deadlines to 10 days was vacated by a federal court in March 2026 before it took effect, and EOIR has told its judges that the deadline remains 30 days. Even so, the decision whether to appeal is best made on the day the judge rules.

What families can do in the first days

• Find the person on the ICE locator and write down the A-Number, the name of the facility and where it is.
• Collect proof of address and of how long the person has lived here: leases, utility bills, tax returns, school records.
• Collect proof of family ties: birth certificates of U.S. citizen children, marriage certificates, and the naturalization certificates or green cards of close relatives.
• Ask the person’s employer for a signed letter on letterhead confirming the job, how long it has lasted and that it is open on release.
• If there has ever been an arrest, get certified court records showing how it was resolved. Whether an arrest leads to mandatory detention can turn on exactly those records.
• Keep every paper ICE or the court gives the person, including the Notice to Appear if one has been issued.
• The person in detention should not sign documents they do not understand, and should speak to a lawyer before agreeing to leave the United States.

How Michelotti & Associates can help

Michelotti & Associates represents people in removal proceedings from its office in Oak Brook. If someone in your family has been detained by ICE, call 630.928.0100 and tell us at the first call that the person is detained and where, because it changes what we do first and how quickly. Our page on deportation and removal defense explains the rest of the process, and Spanish speakers can read our abogado de deportación page.

This article is general information about the law as of October 16, 2026, not legal advice about any person’s case. Detention law is changing quickly; check the current position with a lawyer before relying on it.

This article is general information, not legal advice about your situation. Reading it does not create an attorney–client relationship.