Washington, Jan 24 (NationPress) This week, three federal courts in the United States have questioned immigration practices regarding the detention of noncitizens and the processing of immigration benefits, providing partial relief to Indian nationals and permitting their lawsuits to proceed.

In Michigan, a federal judge mandated that immigration authorities must grant an Indian asylum seeker a bond hearing or release him from detention. The US District Court for the Western District of Michigan determined that Harjot Singh, who has been in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody since July 2025, was being unlawfully detained.

Singh arrived in the United States in May 2022 and subsequently applied for asylum. He was initially paroled into the country due to a lack of detention space and later obtained work authorization and a Social Security number.

His arrest by ICE occurred during a routine check-in.

The court ruled that Singh should not be subject to mandatory detention regulations and declared his detention a violation of the Fifth Amendment's due process protections. The judge instructed ICE to conduct a bond hearing within five business days or to release him without delay.

In Washington, a different federal judge permitted portions of a lawsuit filed by Divya Venigalla, an Indian citizen, against the US Citizenship and Immigration Services to move forward. Venigalla contested the agency's handling of her appeal following the denial of an immigrant investor green card petition.

Although Venigalla filed her appeal in a timely manner, it was initially rejected due to a missing signature. She later resubmitted the appeal with the required page included, but the agency dismissed this second filing as untimely, failing to consider her argument for equitable tolling.

The US District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed her mandamus claims but allowed her claims under the Administrative Procedure Act to proceed. The judge indicated that the agency might have violated legal obligations by not addressing her equitable tolling argument, even if the final decision remains discretionary.

In Missouri, a federal court provided a mixed ruling on a case presented by Harsh Kumar Patel, an Indian national seeking relief from delays in his U visa applications. Patel sought U non-immigrant status after experiencing an armed robbery.

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri dismissed Patel's claims regarding delays in a discretionary 'bona fide determination', asserting that Congress prohibits courts from reviewing such decisions. However, the court did allow his claims about delays in his placement on the U visa waiting list to continue.

The judge stated that federal regulations require immigration authorities to place eligible applicants on a waiting list when visas are unavailable due to annual caps, affirming the court's jurisdiction to review claims alleging unlawful delays or withholding.