Federal Court Releases Immigration Detainees Due to Unjustified Detention
Senior Judge John Langstrum, presiding over a federal court in Kansas City, has ordered the release of more than 20 immigration detainees. This decisive action stems from immigration authorities’ inability to justify their continued detention despite months of unsuccessful removal efforts.
According to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, the government typically has 90 days to deport an individual, with a reasonable maximum detention period of six months. Beyond this timeframe, the government must demonstrate that deportation is likely to occur in the near future.
The Topeka Capital Journal first reported that the judge’s frustrations with the situation led him to release these detainees.
Concerns Over Indefinite Detention
Among the cases reviewed by the court was that of Gerardo Reyna Salgado, who had been detained since December 2024 following a state conviction for domestic assault. In a December 2025 ruling, Judge Langstrum concluded that the legal standards for continued detention had not been met in Reyna Salgado’s case.
The judge noted, “The appellants have presented sufficient reason to believe that there is no significant possibility of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” He criticized the lack of progress in moving the case forward, stating that immigration authorities had not made any new attempts for four months.
Langstrum emphasized a critical oversight, noting that authorities “have not even identified the countries they are actively investigating” for deportation. To underscore the severity of this failure, he remarked, “They haven’t even made the required 90-day custody decision for over eight months!” This lack of action suggested a failure to act with diligence, prompting the judge to deem the detention excessive.
“Complainant’s detention was unjustifiably indefinite,” he stated, ordering the release of Reyna Salgado on supervised conditions.
Criticism of Inaction by Federal Authorities
The judge’s dissatisfaction extended to another case involving Irakli Dzhugiashvili, an undocumented immigrant from Georgia. He reiterated that immigration authorities had attempted to deport Dzhugiashvili to three countries but provided no detailed information regarding these efforts. “Continued detention is not permitted by statute when deportation is no longer reasonably foreseeable,” Langstrum wrote. He found that federal officials had made no substantial attempts to facilitate Dzhugiashvili’s removal, classifying his detention as indefinite and unlawful.
Email evidence presented in court indicated that authorities had acknowledged the lack of progress in securing a third country for deportation. In October of the previous year, a court had ordered immigration officials to release Dzhugiashvili under appropriate supervision.
These recent rulings reflect a broader pattern of challenges faced by immigration authorities in managing detainee cases, highlighting the legal and ethical dilemmas surrounding detention practices in the United States.
