Judge orders bail hearings for immigrants despite Supreme Court ruling

In this April 23, 2018 file photo, the Supreme Court in Washington. The Supreme Court is siding with the Trump administration over the American Civil Liberties Union in the case of a pregnant immigrant teen who was able to obtain an abortion after filing a lawsuit. (AP Photo/Jessica Gresko) less In this April 23, 2018 file photo, the Supreme Court in Washington. The Supreme Court is siding with the Trump administration over the American Civil Liberties Union in the case of a pregnant immigrant teen ... more Photo: Jessica Gresko, Associated Press Photo: Jessica Gresko, Associated Press Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close Judge orders bail hearings for immigrants despite Supreme Court ruling 1 / 1 Back to Gallery

Despite a U.S. Supreme Court decision rejecting mandatory bail hearings for thousands of immigrants in U.S. custody, a federal magistrate in San Francisco has ordered such hearings every six months for hundreds of migrants in Western states who are in jail awaiting the outcome of their request for political asylum.

The constitutional guarantees of liberty and due process of law require courts to interpret the government’s authority to keep undocumented immigrants in custody during their asylum proceedings to include “an individual bond hearing for prolonged detention,” U.S. Magistrate Jacqueline Scott Corley said Monday.

Corley ordered the government to provide bond hearings every six months for all such immigrants held in the nine Western states covered by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and release them on bail unless the government shows they are dangerous or likely to flee. Corley also allowed two Mexican men who have been jailed in Richmond for more than six months, both with Bay Area families, to proceed with a class-action suit seeking the right to periodic bail review.

“They will now finally have the opportunity to be reunited with their families and communities and return to their jobs while they pursue their cases,” said Alison Pennington of Centro Legal de la Raza in Oakland, a lawyer for the two men.

The Department of Homeland Security declined to comment. The department has appealed previous rulings granting bail consideration for immigrants in detention, under both the Trump and the Obama administrations, including the 2013 Ninth Circuit ruling that temporarily granted all immigrants held nationwide the right to a hearing after six months in custody.

That ruling applied to a broad class of noncitizens facing possible deportation, including legal residents convicted of serious crimes and others who claimed the right to remain in the country because of hardships to U.S. family members. In February, the Supreme Court overturned the appeals court’s decision in a 5-3 ruling and said the federal law under which the suit was filed requires detention throughout the deportation proceedings.

The court returned the case to the Ninth Circuit to decide whether that law violates the Constitution, a case that is still pending. Meanwhile, however, the two men detained in Richmond filed suit in March under a separate law that applies mainly to a group of asylum-seekers — those who have been found, by an asylum officer, to have a “credible fear” of being persecuted or tortured if returned to their homeland, but remain in custody while awaiting a hearing in immigration court.

Both men, Esteban Aleman Gonzalez of Antioch and Jose Eduardo Gutierrez Sanchez of San Lorenzo, were arrested last year after being deported and then re-entering the country. Both have children who are U.S. citizens. Aleman Gonzalez says he has been targeted by a drug cartel and would be tortured or killed if returned to Mexico. Gutierrez Sanchez is bisexual and says he was attacked by a criminal organization in Mexico before fleeing to the United States.

An immigration judge recently ruled in favor of Gutierrez Sanchez and canceled his deportation order, but the government has appealed and kept him in custody, said attorney Amalia Wille. An immigration officer said Gutierrez Sanchez had a criminal record that included robbery and spousal battery.

Corley, in her ruling, said the law in the current case is different from the one that the Supreme Court interpreted to require detention without bond — in fact, she said, the high court in 2001 allowed bail hearings under the asylum law, and the Ninth Circuit later required such hearings. The Supreme Court may take a different view now, she said, but until then she is bound to require such hearings to avoid violating the Constitution.

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: begelko@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @BobEgelko