The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a Trump-era immigration policy that permits the indefinite detention of immigrants who entered the country illegally years ago. The court’s decision, announced Thursday, signals a willingness to address significant aspects of the former administration’s tough immigration enforcement measures as the justices begin their new term on Monday.

The policy in question marks a notable shift from longstanding practice, under which immigrants arrested years after illegal entry were typically given the chance to seek release through a bond hearing before an immigration judge. Last year, the Trump administration reinterpreted a 1996 law, arguing that it allowed for the detention of noncitizens without bond, effectively denying hearings to many immigrants who have lived in the United States for extended periods.

The court’s decision to hear this case aligns with its earlier move to fast-track consideration of another Trump-era policy permitting the deportation of immigrants to countries where they have few or no ties, including nations accused of human rights abuses. Taken together, these cases will offer the justices an opportunity to weigh the legality of core elements of the administration’s aggressive deportation and detention agenda.

Currently, roughly 70,000 individuals are in immigrant detention nationwide, nearly double the number reported prior to the Trump presidency. According to data, over two-thirds of undocumented immigrants residing in the U.S. have lived there for at least ten years. The vast majority of federal courts that have addressed the issue have rejected the administration’s interpretation, ruling that migrants detained after long-term residence should be afforded bond hearings to assess whether they pose a flight risk or danger to public safety.

One prominent case involved Brazilian immigrant Ricardo Aparecido Barbosa Da Cunha, who crossed the southern border in 2004 and has lived in Massachusetts for nearly two decades. Da Cunha owns a construction business, a home, and has a family, including two U.S. citizen children. After being detained in 2023 without a bond hearing, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit sided with him, underscoring that Congress had never overridden the long-standing practice of allowing bond hearings despite extensive immigration law changes.

In legal filings, the government, represented by Solicitor General D. John Sauer, urged the court to overturn lower court rulings, arguing that detaining immigrants living in the country long after an illegal entry helps ensure they do not evade hearings and facilitates their eventual removal.

Immigrant advocacy groups contend the policy infringes on federal law by denying detainees an opportunity to seek release and a fair bond hearing. They warn that the administration’s broader interpretation of the statute could enable the government to imprison millions of noncitizens indefinitely without judicial oversight, a departure from precedent upheld by five presidential administrations over three decades.

Michael K.T. Tan, deputy director of the A.C.L.U.’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, criticized the policy as “cruel and inhumane,” emphasizing that the government cannot legally detain immigrants for prolonged periods without a bond hearing.

In addition to this immigration case, the Supreme Court added two other matters to its docket for the term: a Kentucky dispute involving religious discrimination claims by Catholic priests seeking to build a shrine against local opposition, and a divorce case concerning military benefits from North Dakota. Decisions on all cases are expected by next June.