New Bill Expands Mandatory Detention for Non-Citizens, Adding Trespassing and Vandalism to Removal Triggers

The “Safeguarding American Property Act of 2025” sounds like it’s about protecting your home, but the real action is tucked away in Section 2, which significantly changes who immigration authorities must detain while removal proceedings are pending. For busy people, this bill expands the list of relatively minor property crimes that trigger mandatory detention for non-citizens—including lawful permanent residents—meaning no bond hearing and potentially long stays in custody.

The Fine Print: Mandatory Detention Expands

Right now, certain crimes—like serious felonies or aggravated felonies—require immigration officials to automatically detain a non-citizen without allowing them a bond hearing while their case goes through the courts. This bill broadens that list under Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Specifically, it adds convictions for trespassing, vandalism, and arson to the list of offenses that trigger this mandatory detention rule. Think about that for a second: a conviction for vandalism, which could be anything from spray-painting a wall to keying a car, now carries the same mandatory detention consequence as burglary.

Real-World Impact: Losing the Right to Bond

What does ‘mandatory detention’ actually mean? It means the person cannot ask a judge to set bail or bond. They must remain locked up until their removal case is decided, which, given the current backlogs in the immigration court system, can take months or even years. For a lawful permanent resident (a green card holder) who has lived in the U.S. for decades but gets convicted of, say, trespassing during a protest or a minor act of vandalism, this bill means they lose the ability to go home, keep their job, and prepare their legal defense from the outside. They are detained, regardless of whether a judge thinks they are a flight risk or a danger to the community.

The Cost of Minor Offenses

The most significant impact here is applying a severe, liberty-restricting measure—mandatory detention—to offenses that can be relatively minor. Trespassing, for instance, is often a misdemeanor. By grouping these lower-level property crimes with serious offenses, the bill effectively removes judicial discretion and forces immigration agencies to detain people who might otherwise be released on bond. For the affected individual, this translates to lost wages, disruption of family life, and the immense stress of prolonged incarceration, all stemming from a conviction that might not even carry a prison sentence in the criminal justice system.

Clarifying the Language, Expanding the Net

Section 2 also cleans up some technical language regarding violent offenses, replacing a confusing phrase with the clearer term “serious bodily injury, trespassing, vandalism, and arson.” While the stated benefit might be clarity, the practical effect is to cement these newly added property crimes right alongside offenses involving serious physical harm as grounds for mandatory detention. This bill is a significant expansion of the government's power to detain individuals based on property crime convictions, potentially subjecting a much wider range of non-citizens to lengthy, mandatory incarceration during their removal proceedings.