The Trump administration on Monday, Sept. 21, filed a new petition asking the Supreme Court to review a district court ruling that granted a bond hearing to a noncitizen detained under Section 1226(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The petition in Genalo v. D.C. arrives just ten days after the administration told the Court that Genalo v. Black, a case granted in June and set for argument in October, had become moot and should be dropped from the docket.

The new filing covers the same essential ground as the dismissed case, but it skips the federal appeals court that would normally review the matter before the Supreme Court. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the justices to take the case anyway. "The Court has previously granted certiorari before judgment to allow a case to replace one that was dismissed," Sauer wrote, asking the justices to "do the same here."

When the administration notified the Court on Sept. 11 that Genalo v. Black was moot, Sauer said his team hoped the justices would still "resolve the questions presented" during the 2026-27 term and would work to "identify[] alternative vehicles" for returning the issue to the Court.

The Underlying Question

Both Genalo cases ask at what point, if any, noncitizens detained for an extended period under Section 1226(c) have a due process right to a bond hearing under the Fifth Amendment, and what the government must show to justify continued detention if such a hearing is required. Section 1226(c) mandates detention of noncitizens, including green card holders, who have committed certain crimes and are awaiting removal proceedings.

The Supreme Court last addressed the statute in 2018 in Jennings v. Rodriguez, holding that the statute itself does not require periodic bond hearings. The justices considered, but did not resolve, whether due process would eventually require such hearings amid lengthy detention.

The Court granted review in Genalo v. Black in June to answer that question. The two noncitizens in that case, Carol Williams Black and Keisy G.M., had been detained for approximately seven and 21 months, respectively. Black voluntarily left the United States before the justices agreed to hear the case, and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul pardoned G.M. in August, removing him from the statute's reach. In September, the administration and attorneys for the challengers stipulated that the case should be dismissed.

The New Vehicle

The replacement case involves a man identified only as D.C. in court filings. Born in the Dominican Republic in 1963, D.C. "[a]t an unknown time and place" "unlawfully entered the United States," according to the petition. He has "been convicted of multiple crimes" while in the U.S., and the Department of Homeland Security detained him under Section 1226(c) in September 2025 after his most recent prison stay ended.

In March, D.C. challenged his prolonged detention as a due process violation. A federal district court agreed that he had a constitutional right to a bond hearing. That hearing has since taken place, and DHS released D.C. from custody on March 31. The administration now asks the Supreme Court to review the district court ruling and restore the issue of immigration detention without bond to the 2026-27 oral argument docket. D.C.'s response is due by Oct. 21.

A Second Petition on District Court Authority

In a separate petition filed Monday, the administration asked the justices to address the authority of district courts over claims by a noncitizen who challenges the validity of his detention while awaiting removal proceedings, when those claims also go to the validity of the grounds for his removal — an issue district courts lack authority to review.

That case centers on the administration's decision to detain Georgetown University scholar Badar Khan Suri and begin removal proceedings against him. Suri, an advocate of Palestinian rights, contends the detention violated his free speech and due process rights.

Practical Consequences

For immigration practitioners, the petitions signal that the Court will likely decide during the 2026-27 term whether prolonged Section 1226(c) detention triggers a constitutional bond-hearing right — and, if so, what burden the government must carry to keep a noncitizen locked up. The certiorari-before-judgment request in Genalo v. D.C. would, if granted, compress the ordinary appellate timeline and give the government a fast path back to the argument calendar. Counsel for detained clients should track the Court's response to the government's cert-before-judgment plea, monitor the Oct. 21 response deadline, and assess how a ruling on district court jurisdiction in the Suri case could reshape where and how detention challenges tied to removal grounds can be brought.