Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Kenneth Genalo, Director of the New York Field Office of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al. v. Carol Williams Black, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 20-3224, 22-70 · judgment May 31, 2024
Before the decision, about 2× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a Second Circuit decision below, and a state or local-government petitioner.
Questions presented
Under 8 U.S.C. 1226(c), certain criminal aliens are required to be detained pending a decision on whether they are to be removed from the United States. In Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281 (2018), this Court held that Section 1226(c) prohibits the release of such aliens on bond. The Court reserved judgment on various constitutional issues on which it had ordered supplemental briefing, including whether the Due Process Clause requires bond hearings for certain Section 1226(c) detainees and, if so, what kind of bond hearing. Respondents here are two criminal aliens detained under Section 1226(c) for 7 and 21 months, respectively, pending their removal proceedings. The court of appeals held that each respondent's detention had become "unreasonably prolonged," such that due process entitled him to a bond hearing with the burden placed on the government to justify his continued detention by clear and convincing evidence. Pet. App. 5a. The questions presented are:
-
Whether there is a point at which an alien's detention under Section 1226(c), pending a decision on whether he is to be removed, becomes "unreasonably prolonged," such that due process requires a bond hearing.
-
If so, whether, in such a bond hearing, due process requires placing the burden on the government to justify the alien's continued detention by clear and convincing evidence. THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI IS GRANTED AS TO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT CASE NO. 22-70. IN ADDITION TO THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED BY THE PETITION, THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: WHETHER G.M.'S CASE IS NOW MOOT.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
For respondent
Cecillia Derphine Wang
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Amicus briefs
3 merits
(3 supporting pet./neither)
Proceedings
- Aug 31 2026Brief of respondent G. M. filed. (Distributed)
- Aug 17 2026Motion to abbreviate and redact respondent’s last name GRANTED.
- Aug 17 2026CIRCULATED
- Aug 06 2026Brief amicus curiae of America First Legal Foundation filed.
- Aug 06 2026Brief amicus curiae of Federation for American Immigration Reform filed.
- Aug 06 2026Amicus brief of Iowa and 26 States not accepted for filing. (To be corrected - August 10, 2026)
- Aug 06 2026Brief amici curiae of Iowa, et al. filed. (Corrected)
- Aug 04 2026SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 13, 2026.
- Jul 30 2026Brief of petitioners Kenneth Genalo, et al. filed.
- Jul 30 2026Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioners Kenneth Genalo, et al.
- Jul 14 2026Motion to abbreviate and redact respondent’s last name filed by respondent G. M.
- Jun 15 2026Petition GRANTED as to United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Case No. 22-70. In addition to the questions presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether G. M.'s case is now moot.
- Jun 15 2026As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.
- Jun 08 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/11/2026.
- Jun 03 2026Electronic record of sealed materials received from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
- Jun 02 2026Electronic record of sealed materials received from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- Jun 01 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2026.
- Jun 01 2026Record Requested.
- May 12 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/28/2026.
- May 12 2026Reply of petitioners Kenneth Genalo, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- May 11 2026Letter of May 6, 2026 from counsel for respondents filed.
- May 06 2026Suggestion of mootness submitted by respondent Carol W. Black and filed April 28, 2025, removed from the docket. Brief not accepted for filing. See Rule 15.4.
- May 04 2026Letter of May 4, 2026 from counsel for respondents Carol Williams Black, et al. filed. (Docket entry corrected June 2, 2026)
- Apr 28 2026Brief of respondents Carol Williams Black, et al. in opposition filed.
- Feb 12 2026Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 28, 2026.
- Feb 11 2026Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 27, 2026 to April 28, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jan 22 2026
- Jan 22 2026Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.