Effect of Jennings v. Rodriguez Decision on Detainee Advocacy - Recording (.MP3)

Effect of Jennings v. Rodriguez Decision on Detainee Advocacy - Recording (.MP3)

Your Price:
Late-Breaking Seminar Recording
Recorded 05/21/2018
CLE Eligible No
Length 90 min.
Format MP3
SKU WS2018-05-21-DL

Jennings v. Rodriguez. The decision held that INA §§235(b), 236(a), and 236(c) do not allow periodic bond hearings for those subject to pre-final order mandatory detention because they are considered "arriving aliens" or because of certain types of criminal convictions. The Court did not decide the constitutionality of prolonged or indefinite detention in these cases. Our panel of experts will explain how this decision affects advocacy for clients subject to mandatory detention.

Featured Topics

  • Jennings v. Rodriguez on U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals Decisions Requiring Individualized Bond Determinations After Prolonged Detention (E.g., Sopo v. Attorney General and Ly v. Hansen)
  • Seeking Release from ICE on Bond or Through Parole
  • Challenging Constitutionality of Prolonged Detention Post-Jennings Through Habeas
Due to the late-breaking nature of the program and jurisdictional requirements, CLE credit is not available for this seminar.


  • Veronica Barba (DL), Los Angeles, CA
  • Jessica K. Miles, El Paso, TX
  • Anthony Enriquez, Director, Unaccompanied Minors Program at Catholic Charities Community Services, New York, NY

The speaker's/author's views do not necessarily represent the views of AILA, nor do they constitute legal advice or representation. Practice tips provided are based on the speaker's/author's experiences and the current state of the law. Please be sure to conduct legal research and analysis for your unique situation as the law changes quickly and experiences may differ from your own.

Related Products: