In the specific case, the respondents were legal immigrants in California that had been convicted of criminal charges, each which fell into the class that could lead to deportation, and served their time.

With help from the American Civil Liberties Union, the three sued the Department of Homeland Security, arguing that because they were not immediately detained on release from the criminal sentence, Sect.

In the 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's two rulings and stated that the language of Section 1226 allowed detention at any time after the deportable offense.

Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated that Congress enacted mandatory detention out of concern that individualized hearings could not be trusted to reveal which deportable criminal aliens who are not detained might continue to engage in crime or fail to appear for their removal hearings, and that allowing for detention long after release reflected the fact that immigration officials are not always notified or available in a timely manner to be at the point of release.

However, Alito did acknowledge that this interpretation would end up targeting a wider range of immigrants, including those that have only had minor infractions such as drug offenders and tax cheats, but was necessary to serve the purpose of the law as written by Congress.