Chapter Three: Alleviating Other Hardships There are no paths to citizenship or lawful permanent residence based on a statelessness status for stateless individuals living in the United States. Those with a final order of removal may be detained, typically face restrictive reporting requirements, are rarely able to travel outside of the United States, and must renew their employment authorization indefinitely. Section 1: Challenging Detention Stateless individuals in the United States often are held in immigration detention by ICE before, during, and even after their court proceedings, including after they have received a final administrative order of removal. Detention is one of the most compelling hardships that stateless people face. The following presents considerations for stateless people in presenting challenges to their detention. Like all people, stateless individuals must be protected from arbitrary detention. In order for detention not to be arbitrary, it must be necessary in each individual case, reasonable in all the circumstances, proportionate to any risks presented, and non-discriminatory in nature.192 It also requires independent, periodic review of the on-going appropriateness of detention. Indefinite as well as mandatory forms of detention are arbitrary per se. Practice Point Similar to refugees, stateless individuals, by virtue of their stateless status, arguably have a particular incentive to attend their immigration appointments in the interest of resolving their status. Thus, generally speaking, an individual’s status as a stateless person should be considered as a factor in detention decisions. Likewise, given the strong unlikelihood of removal, it is not reasonable to detain a stateless person with a final order of removal solely to effectuate removal. This is similar to the situation of an individual who has been granted Withholding under INA §241(b)(3) or withholding or deferral of removal under CAT. Under U.S. law, there are various moments when a stateless person may challenge her detention by ICE. This includes during removal proceedings (a bond hearing before an IJ); immediately following a final administrative order of removal; at the 90-day post-order custody review; at the 180-day custody review; and beyond (via a petition for a writ of habeas corpus). 1. Bond Hearing before an Immigration Judge The bond hearing is an individual’s first opportunity to present her case for release from ICE detention before an independent authority. Certain individuals may motion for a custody redetermination hearing before an Immigration Judge pursuant to INA §240.193 In making a decision on a motion for bond, an IJ will For an in-depth discussion of the international human rights framework prohibiting arbitrary deprivation of liberty, particularly in the context of asylum-seekers, see UNHCR, GUIDELINES ON THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND STANDARDS RELATING TO THE DETENTION OF ASYLUM-SEEKERS AND ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION (2012), available at http://www.unhcr.org/505b10ee9.html. 193 “Arriving” non-citizens are not eligible for a custody redetermination hearing before an IJ, though they may request discretionary grant of parole by DHS. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(h)(2)(i)(B)). Also, individuals who are deportable on certain criminal grounds as specified under INA §236(c), or found to be subject to mandatory detention related to provisions for suspected terrorists under INA §236A, are not eligible for bond. 192 44