TOPEKA — Aug. 29, 2025. Wichita TV station KAKE reported this week that “undocumented immigrants detained in Kansas are no longer eligible for release on bond,” attributing the change to a “new ruling from the Kansas City Immigration Court.”
That headline tracks with a broader national push this summer to sharply limit immigration bonds—but the legal picture is more complicated than a blanket, permanent “no bond in Kansas” rule.
What changed nationally
On July 8, ICE’s acting director Todd M. Lyons issued internal guidance telling officers that immigrants who entered without inspection should be detained “for the duration of their removal proceedings,” effectively cutting off bond hearings before immigration judges. Multiple national outlets reviewed and reported on the memo. The Washington PostReutersAP NewsABC News
That memo leaned on recent case law—including Matter of Q. Li from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) on May 15, which explained that many recent entrants are treated as applicants for admission under INA § 235(b)—a detention authority that does not provide bond through an immigration judge. Department of Justice
The twist since early August
On Aug. 4, the Attorney General designated the BIA’s Matter of Akhmedov as nationwide precedent. The opinion itself is a bond case under INA § 236(a) (the statute that does allow immigration-judge bond hearings) and, critically, the designation order puts weight behind the view that not all unlawful entrants are automatically in § 235(b) detention. In other words, some people remain bond-eligible depending on how they were arrested and processed. Department of Justice+1
Kansas City–based immigration practitioners read Akhmedov as undercutting a blanket no-bond stance and restoring case-by-case custody decisions in many scenarios. hoppocklawfirm.com+1
What this means in Kansas right now
- Court & coverage area. The Kansas City Immigration Court handles non-detained cases for both Kansas and Missouri and hears many detained-case custody reviews; detainees tied to Kansas cases are often held out of state (e.g., Kay County Detention Center in Oklahoma) while their cases are pending. Department of JusticeICE
- Facility churn. A plan to reopen a Leavenworth facility for ICE detainees has been blocked in court pending local permitting—so the nearest large-scale ICE beds are still across the state line or in Oklahoma and beyond. AP NewsKCURKansas Reflector
- Practice on the ground. Since July, attorneys report more bond denials where DHS argues people are held under § 235(b). Since Aug. 4, lawyers also report pushing back with Akhmedov when facts show § 236(a) applies—i.e., where the person was arrested in the interior and put into standard removal proceedings, not treated as an arriving applicant. (Whether a given judge agrees is fact-specific.)
What we know — and what we don’t
We know:
- ICE’s July 8 memo aimed to eliminate bond hearings for broad categories of people who entered unlawfully. That’s informing how local ICE lawyers frame custody in court. The Washington Post
- BIA’s Q. Li (May 15) strengthens DHS arguments that many new entrants fall under § 235(b) with no bond before a judge. Department of Justice
- Akhmedov (designated Aug. 4) is now precedent and is a § 236(a) bond case, reinforcing that bond hearings still exist when § 236(a) governs. Department of Justice
We don’t know (yet):
- Whether the Kansas City Immigration Court issued any written local order beyond applying the national guidance and precedents. KAKE did not publish such an order, and EOIR hasn’t posted one publicly. (We’ve asked EOIR and ICE-ERO Kansas City to clarify current practice.) Department of Justice
- How uniformly judges here are now distinguishing § 235(b) vs. § 236(a) after Akhmedov.
What families should expect
- State vs. federal: This has no effect on Kansas criminal bail. Someone can bond out of state charges and still be held by ICE, or vice versa.
- Case-by-case reality: If DHS classifies someone under § 235(b), no bond hearing is available before an immigration judge. If DHS (or the court) treats the case under § 236(a), the person can seek bond—but must prove they’re not a danger or flight risk. Department of Justice
- Where someone may be held: Many Kansas-tied detainees are in Kay County, OK or other regional facilities; Leavenworth remains blocked from opening to ICE detainees pending litigation. ICEAP News
Have a tip or experience with a recent bond denial in Kansas/Missouri immigration court? Email newsroom: [email protected]. We’ll keep tracking court filings and update as we get formal responses from EOIR and ICE-ERO KCMO.
Editor’s note: This story will be updated as new documents surface or agencies clarify current practice.
