No. 16-1363October Term 2018Decided Mar 19, 2019
Nielsen v. Preap
A late immigration arrest did not, by itself, take these noncitizens out of the mandatory-detention category.
Case status
- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released Mar 19, 2019
- What it's about
The case was about whether certain noncitizens with qualifying criminal convictions must be held in mandatory immigration detention even when federal immigration officials do not arrest them immediately after they are released from criminal custody. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that a delay in taking them into immigration custody does not take them out of the mandatory-detention rule.
Question presented
Whether a criminal alien becomes exempt from mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. 1226(c) if, after the alien is released from criminal custody, the Department of Homeland Security does not take him into immigration custody immediately.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Decision released Mar 19, 2019
- Area
Immigration
Briefing
What it's about
The case asked whether certain noncitizens with qualifying criminal convictions avoid mandatory immigration detention if federal officials do not arrest them immediately after release from criminal custody. On March 19, 2019, the Supreme Court said that a delay does not remove them from that mandatory-detention rule.
Vote
The Supreme Court decided the case on March 19, 2019, but the prompt does not provide the vote count or opinion lineup.
Impact
The decision affects when immigration officials may require detention without a separate bond process for some noncitizens with listed criminal convictions. For example, a person released from jail who is picked up later by federal immigration officers can still be placed in mandatory detention.
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished this case. The practical next step is for lower courts and immigration officials to apply the Court's reading of the detention statute in similar cases.
What was the main fight in Nielsen v. Preap?
The dispute was over timing. The question was whether mandatory immigration detention still applies if federal officers do not arrest someone immediately after release from criminal custody.
Who is most affected by the Court's decision?
Certain noncitizens with qualifying criminal convictions are most affected. Even after a delay, they may still face mandatory detention when immigration officials later take them into custody.
What happens after the Supreme Court's decision in this case?
The Court's work on this docket is over. Lower courts and immigration authorities now use this interpretation when similar detention disputes arise.
Decision
What the Court decided
A late immigration arrest did not, by itself, take these noncitizens out of the mandatory-detention category.
Impact
The decision affects when immigration officials may require detention without a separate bond process for some noncitizens with listed criminal convictions. For example, a person released from jail who is picked up later by federal immigration officers can still be placed in mandatory detention.
Not official Court text.
Opinion documents
Related cases




Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jun 1, 2026
- Method
- Methodology
Primary materials8
Supreme Court docket 16-1363
docket | Jun 1, 2026
Primary case document
Supreme Court document | Jun 1, 2026
CourtListener docket record
docket | Jun 1, 2026
Questions Presented
brief | May 24, 2026
opinion
opinion | Mar 19, 2019
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jun 1, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jun 1, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jun 1, 2026