weigh the equities in favor of releasing the individual, against any risk of flight or danger to the community that she presents. Factors to take into consideration in terms of equities include community ties, employment history, and immigration record.194 Stateless persons have often lived in their communities for an extended period of time and have deep community ties, as well as employment history. The element of statelessness may reflect in the immigration history where, for example, the individual had to obtain fraudulent documents in order to travel. Moreover, while the ability of DHS to eventually effectuate removal in a particular case is considered a less significant factor195 in the bond determination, in a stateless person’s case, this may be uniquely relevant, as at least part of the justification for detention is to ensure compliance with an eventual removal order. Practice Point Individuals who are ineligible for a custody redetermination hearing may be eligible for release on parole pursuant to INA §212(d)(5)(a). Such individuals should consider making a request for release from detention to DHS. At least one federal court has also found that an immigration judge may release an individual on conditional parole, including on her own recognizance, under INA §236(a). 196 3. Immediately Following a Final Administrative Order of Removal Following a final administrative order of removal, a non-citizen may be held in detention in order to facilitate ICE’s efforts to secure removal. This authority has a limit of 90 days during which the individual may be held without review of the need to detain.197 However, ICE may, in its discretion, release an individual during this period. Requesting discretionary release during this period should address the justification for detention (e.g., to facilitate removal) and present arguments as to why such justification is less likely. For example, in the case of stateless people, removal is highly unlikely, if not impossible. Notably, given that certain types of protection from removal actually carry an underlying removal order (e.g., Withholding or deferral of removal) a stateless person granted such protection may be subject to detention for the 90-day period following the final administrative decision. Given the dual factors weighing against likelihood of removal (e.g., statelessness, as well as the administrative order protection), stateless persons in this situation have particularly strong equities weighing in favor of their release from detention.198 Practice Point During the 90-day removal period, the detained individual is required by law to make attempts to assist ICE in securing removal to a country. This requirement attaches to stateless people, despite the fact that they have no country to which they can be removed. Importantly, if the individual refuses to make attempts to facilitate her removal, this may be used to justify her continued detention past the 90-day removal period.199 Similarly, demonstrating repeated, albeit unsuccessful, attempts to secure removal will support release at the 90-day review. As such, it is important to document all such attempts/contacts, as well as any responses. 194See EOIR, IMMIGRATION JUDGE BENCH BOOK INTRODUCTORY GUIDE – BOND, [hereinafter EOIR Bench Book- Bond] available at https://www.justice.gov/eoir/file/830231/download; see also DOROTHY HARBECK, BOND HEARINGS IN A NUTSHELL, in PRISON LAW 2015 (Practising Law Institute ed., 2015). 195 See EOIR Bench Book- Bond (citing Matter of P-C-M, 20 I&N Dec. 432 (BIA 1991)). 196 See Rivera v. Holder, 307 F.R.D. 539 (W.D. Wash. 2015). 197 See 8 U.S.C. §1231(a). 198 See Memo, Cooper, INS, General Counsel, HQCOU 50/1.1 (Apr. 21, 2000), reprinted in 77 No. 39 Interpreter Releases 1445, 1460 (Oct. 9, 2000). 199 See 8 U.S.C.1231(a)(1)(C). 45