CHICAGO — A recent decision by a federal judge in California could pave the way for the release of tens of thousands of immigrants detained by federal authorities this year, according to information obtained by the ABC 7 I-Team.

The ruling addresses a contentious policy change implemented by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) earlier this summer. This policy enforced mandatory detention for numerous individuals apprehended by immigration officials, effectively removing their right to a bond hearing before an immigration judge.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

Legal experts have informed the I-Team that this “mandatory detention” policy contradicts longstanding legal precedents.

For Ramiro Cabrera, a father from the Chicago area, the DHS policy resulted in his confinement at an ICE detention facility for 41 days until a federal judge ordered his release.

Upon regaining his freedom, Cabrera expressed mixed emotions to the I-Team, stating, “I just wanted to cry tears of joy and sadness because my fellow detainees left behind don’t deserve to be there.”

Cabrera’s arrest occurred during “Operation Midway Blitz,” following more than 20 years of living in the United States without documentation.

His attorney Jennifer Peyton argued he has no criminal record but was denied a chance to plead his case via a bond hearing before a judge based on DHS’ mandatory detention policy.

Peyton, a former Assistant Chief Immigration Judge who was fired by the Trump Administration this past July, explained the mandatory detention policy, “overturned decades of case law, of regulations and laws indicating that for someone who is here without authorization… that they are entitled to a bond if they can show that they are not a flight risk danger the community.”

For Cabrera, he was ordered released after Peyton filed a habeas petition in federal court. His case is one of hundreds filed in federal courts across the country, including here in the Northern District of Illinois, arguing that DHS policy of denying bond hearings for those arrested on immigration offenses is unprecedented and unlawful.

A DHS spokesperson previously told the I-Team the new mandatory detention policy change was “a big win… securing our ability to detain illegal aliens until they are deported.”

Those challenges to the policy shift are also at the center of a class-action lawsuit filed in California — titled Bautista v. Noem — representing immigrants detained by the Trump administration like Cabrera.

ACLU Senior Staff Attorney My Khanh Ngo represents that class of people she says have been denied due process.

“These are neighbors. These are people who’ve been in the community for decades, have had jobs, have built families here,” Ngo said on Tuesday. “They were always, until July 2025, classified as under discretionary detention, meaning the government did not have to detain them.”

In the California case, U.S. District Judge Sunshine Sykes certified a nationwide class that could grant relief to all migrants who were denied the ability to seek release on bond.

In her Nov. 25 ruling, Sykes said, “The declaratory relief requested-a ruling that the policy violates Petitioners’ and putative class members’ statutory and constitutional rights-would provide the entire class with relief from continued deprivation of their rights.”

Ngo said Judge Sykes’ ruling is an important development that applies nationwide.

“The decision that the court made, rejecting the government’s position, is super important,” Ngo told the I-Team. “It shows that people do have access to bond hearings and will have that chance to show that they don’t need to be in detention.”

Since the ruling came down, not all immigration judges have abided by it.

In an immigration court decision recently handed down in Memphis that was shared with the I-Team, a judge denied a person’s bond hearing request, stating further guidance from the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) was required. The EOIR is the federal agency that oversees the immigration court system.

A status hearing to further discuss Judge Sykes order has been scheduled for Jan. 16, 2026.

Ngo said she and her colleagues on the case will be showing evidence to Judge Sykes of cases where her order hasn’t been followed.

“We’ve been telling people that they should be requesting bond hearings,” Ngo said. “Some judges have granted bond hearings, so I think there seems to be conflicting interpretations on the immigration judges’ side. That’s why we are planning to go back in front of the District Court [on Jan. 16, 2026] to bring evidence of this confusion and seek further relief for the entire class.”

In court filings, attorneys with the ACLU have estimated this decision could impact more than 36,000 immigrant cases nationwide.