CHICAGO (WLS) — The decision from a looming U.S. Supreme Court case could impact millions of undocumented families across the country, many in Chicago.<\/p>\n
It’s a crucial beam holding up President Trump’s deportation agenda: Mandatory detention for all undocumented immigrants detained, regardless of if they have a criminal history.<\/p>\n
But as the ABC7 I-Team has reported over the past year, many have successfully challenged the policy in court, earning a temporary freedom.<\/p>\n
ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24\/7. Click here to watch<\/a><\/p>\n Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take on a case weighing whether the administration’s policy shift is lawful.<\/p>\n Over the last year, the I-Team was there to capture moments some parents feared they wouldn’t see when they were reunited with their families back in Chicago after they were arrested by federal immigration agents.<\/p>\n “Every day felt like an eternity for me being in there,” said Josue Pire-Hidalgo, a Chicago Public Schools custodian that was released<\/a> after 42 days in custody.<\/p>\n “All I wanted to do was cry with happiness,” said Ramiro Cabrera<\/a>, a father who spent 41 days in ICE custody.<\/p>\n Cabrera, Pire-Hidalgo, and thousands more were held in ICE detention after the Trump administration reversed decades of precedent, imposing a mandatory detention policy for all undocumented immigrants.<\/p>\n The Administration argued it was closing “loopholes” that previous administrations used to allow immigrants to remain free.<\/p>\n But these men, and many more, successfully challenged that policy in court.<\/p>\n “They were in very, very large numbers… challenging the lawfulness or the constitutionality of that detention,” said Eva Saltzman, a former Chicago immigration judge.<\/p>\n For ten years, Saltzman determined whether a person was eligible for release while their deportation or removal cases proceeded.<\/p>\n She says the policy shift last year led many people to choose deportation over detention.<\/p>\n “People who would otherwise be seeking relief, who may be eligible for asylum or cancellation of removal, are increasingly going to forgo, forego that application, and forgo that opportunity simply so that they’re released from custody as quickly as possible,” Saltzman said.<\/p>\n After the policy shift, Saltzman said she continued to review cases based on their merits.<\/p>\n