99-7791 & 00-38 Zadvydas v. Davis

Listen to this article

“We have found nothing in the history of these statutes that clearly demonstrates a congressional intent to authorize indefinite, perhaps permanent, detention. Consequently, interpreting the statute to avoid a serious constitutional threat, we conclude that, once removal is no longer reasonably foreseeable, continued detention is no longer authorized by statute.”

“While an argument can be made for confining any presumption to 90 days, we doubt that when Congress shortened the removal period to 90 days in 1996 it believed that all reasonably foreseeable removals could be accomplished in that time. We do have reason to believe, however, that Congress previously doubted the constitutionality of detention for more than six months… Consequently, for the sake of uniform administration in the federal courts, we recognize that period. After this 6-month period, once the alien provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing.”

Vacated and remanded.

Local Effect:

The issue has not previously been considered by the Seventh Circuit.

Breyer, J.; Scalia, J., dissenting; Kennedy, J., dissenting.

Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Fifth Circuit, 208 F.3d 815 and 185 F.3d 279.