(DETROIT, MICHIGAN) A 33-year-old Michigan immigrant battling life-threatening leukemia has been released from ICE custody after a federal judge in Detroit ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement to either free him or give him a prompt bond hearing. U.S. District Judge Brandy McMillion issued the ruling on October 17, 2025, directing that Jose Contreras-Cervantes—and seven other detainees named in the same case—must be released or receive bond hearings within seven days. The court also required a written update by October 27, 2025.
As of October 22, 2025, Contreras-Cervantes has reunited with his family, according to the ACLU and community advocates. VisaVerge.com reports that his release came after urgent filings highlighted his unstable access to cancer treatment while detained.
Court order and health concerns
Contreras-Cervantes has lived in the United States 🇺🇸 for roughly two decades, arriving from Jalisco at age 14. He is married to a U.S. citizen and has three U.S.-citizen children.
He was detained on August 5, 2025, after a traffic stop in suburban Detroit by a Macomb County Sheriff’s officer, then transferred between facilities in Michigan and Ohio. During that period, he went 22 days without his leukemia medication, according to the ACLU, and later received only a substitute drug at the North Lake Processing Center in Baldwin, Michigan.
Doctors have diagnosed him with chronic myeloid leukemia and estimated a four-to-six-year prognosis.
Judge McMillion’s order focuses on immediate due process: either free Contreras-Cervantes or give him a bond hearing before an immigration judge by October 24, 2025. The judge applied the same rule to seven other long-term Michigan residents named in the suit. All eight were detained without bond hearings despite no criminal convictions beyond minor traffic violations.
The ACLU argues that keeping Contreras-Cervantes in ICE custody while blocking a bond hearing placed his health at risk and separated a father from his children without individualized review. Attorneys and medical advocates say the delayed and inconsistent access to cancer medication in detention shows why courts must check blanket detention policies.
“The delayed and inconsistent access to cancer medication in detention shows why courts must check blanket detention policies.” — ACLU and medical advocates (summary of filings)
Policy at the center of the fight
The case arises from a July 8, 2025 directive under President Trump that denies bond hearings to immigrants who entered the country without authorization, regardless of how long they have lived here, their family ties, or lack of criminal record.
The ACLU of Michigan says the policy violates constitutional due process by removing the chance for an immigration judge to assess flight risk and community safety on a case-by-case basis. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, federal courts across the country have started pushing back on similar blanket detention rules, with recent rulings in Washington state and now Detroit.
The U.S. Department of Justice has defended the administration’s approach and argued that challenges belong before immigration appeals bodies, not federal district courts. As of October 22, 2025, it’s not clear whether the government will appeal Judge McMillion’s decision. In the meantime, the court’s order remains binding for the eight Michigan plaintiffs, and the broader policy is facing mounting legal tests in multiple circuits.
The legal backdrop is complex but the key point is simple: federal judges are questioning whether the government can deny a bond hearing to entire groups of people without giving them any chance to show they’re not a danger or a flight risk. Historically, immigration judges conduct bond hearings to weigh these factors.
The Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review explains bond proceedings in its policy manual, which outlines how immigration judges evaluate detention and release in removal cases. Readers can review those rules on the DOJ site at the official EOIR bond proceedings guidance: EOIR Policy Manual, Part II, Chapter 9 (Bond Proceedings).
Contreras-Cervantes’s story also shows how local policing intersects with federal immigration enforcement. A routine traffic stop led to detention without a bond hearing, interrupted cancer care, and a family crisis. Community groups say this is not rare under current enforcement patterns, particularly for long-term residents who lack legal status but have deep ties, steady jobs, and U.S.-citizen children.
What this means for Michigan families
The ACLU’s lawsuit covers eight Michigan residents in similar situations: long-term residents, no criminal histories, and detention without bond hearings. The judge’s order gives them a path to release or review by October 24, 2025.
For families, this can mean parents returning home, resuming work and medical care, and planning legal defenses from outside detention.
Key practical tips:
– For those facing detention now: ask lawyers about seeking bond hearings in light of recent rulings. Even under restrictive policies, court orders can open doors to release.
– For people with serious health conditions: document diagnoses, prescriptions, and treatment plans. Medical records can be vital in court filings and bond requests.
– For loved ones trying to find detainees: keep track of transfers and gather proof of community ties—marriage certificates, children’s birth records, school letters, and employer statements.
Advocates stress that due process matters most when the stakes are highest. Denying bond hearings across the board can keep people locked up for months or longer without any judge checking the facts of their lives or the urgency of their care. In Contreras-Cervantes’s case, this meant weeks without the right medication for leukemia, a disease where timing and consistency are essential.
Stakes, arguments, and next steps
The government’s position: strong detention policies help manage border enforcement and discourage unauthorized entry.
The ACLU’s position: the Constitution requires individualized review and many long-term residents pose no danger.
Courts are weighing these arguments. For now, Detroit joins a growing list of jurisdictions where judges are pushing ICE to either release detainees or justify continued detention through bond hearings.
Contreras-Cervantes’s release is a relief to his wife and children, who had pressed for medication and care while he was inside. It does not resolve his immigration case or his health battles. It does, however, restore access to doctors he trusts and medications his oncologists have prescribed. For many families, that difference is life-saving.
Community groups say more cases are coming. If other Michigan immigrant families see similar orders, ICE will need to schedule bond hearings quickly or release people outright. The EOIR docket, already crowded, may feel new pressure as detainees seek review.
Lawyers expect mixed outcomes, but they say the chance to stand before a judge—rather than sit in a cell without review—is a basic protection the law still provides.
Important dates to watch
- October 24, 2025 — deadline for bond hearings or releases for the eight Michigan plaintiffs.
- October 27, 2025 — deadline for ICE to provide the court with a written update.
Families and attorneys tracking these cases should keep records ready and follow court notices closely. The balance between detention and due process is shifting, case by case, courtroom by courtroom, and the human stakes could not be higher.
This Article in a Nutshell
U.S. District Judge Brandy McMillion ordered ICE to release or provide bond hearings within seven days for eight Michigan detainees named in an ACLU lawsuit, including Jose Contreras-Cervantes, a 33-year-old resident diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukemia. Detained after a traffic stop on August 5, 2025, Contreras-Cervantes reportedly went 22 days without his leukemia medication during transfers between facilities. The case challenges a July 8, 2025 directive denying bond hearings to immigrants who entered without authorization. The court required ICE to give a written update by October 27, 2025. Advocates say the decision underscores due process concerns and the human costs of blanket detention policies, while the DOJ defends the administration’s approach. Contreras-Cervantes has been reunited with his family, but his immigration status and medical treatment still require resolution.
