Institute for Migrant Rights
Railway line at Cianjur station, c. 1890 · KITLV, CC BY 4.0

Migration Jurisprudence from the South › United States

Zadvydas v. Davis

Supreme Court of the United States · United States · 2001-06-28 · National court

Citation: 533 U.S. 678
Type of case: Administrative
Outcome: Decided for the migrant side

Question

May non-citizens ordered removed be detained indefinitely when no country will accept them?

What the court decided

No. The statute implicitly limits detention to a period reasonably necessary for removal, presumptively six months.

In plain language

Men who could not be deported because no country would take them were held for years. The Supreme Court said detention after about six months must end unless removal is likely soon.

Dalam bahasa sederhana

Pria yang tidak bisa dideportasi karena tidak ada negara yang menerima ditahan bertahun-tahun. MA menyatakan penahanan setelah sekitar enam bulan harus berakhir kecuali pemulangan segera mungkin.

Pertanyaan: Bolehkah bukan warga negara yang diperintahkan keluar ditahan tanpa batas ketika tidak ada negara yang mau menerima mereka?

What happened afterwards

  • 2001-06-28: Judgment.

Sources

Open this decision in the interactive collection (compare, filter, Indonesian view, downloads).

Cite as: Institute for Migrant Rights (2026), Migration Jurisprudence from the South, version 0.1, https://theimr.org/court-decisions/d/us-zadvydas-2001/. This page summarizes a court decision for research and advocacy; it is not legal advice.

For researchers

This collection of decisions is built for empirical legal scholarship and socio-legal research on migration and the rights of migrant workers, as well as for advocacy.

The coded variables support statistical analysis in law: cross-national comparison, regression and event-history designs, and law and economics questions such as how recruitment fees, wage protection and limits on changing employer affect migrant workers. The data can be downloaded for replication.

Keywords: case law; jurisprudence; judicial decisions; comparative constitutional law; courts and migration; judicial behavior; litigation outcomes; refugee law; non-refoulement; citizenship and nationality; empirical legal studies; empirical legal scholarship; quantitative legal research; statistical analysis in law; law and economics; law and economics of migration; comparative law; socio-legal studies; legal pluralism; migration law; labor migration; migrant workers’ rights; human rights law; access to justice; Global South; Asia; Africa; Middle East; Latin America; Indonesia; open data; replication data.