The Systematic Dismantling of American Justice: How Immigration Detention Became a Weapon Against Constitutional Rights

The Case of Idris Demirtas: A Portrait of Institutional Failure

Idris Demirtas’s story represents everything that has gone wrong with America’s immigration system under the current administration. This 25-year-old Turkish immigrant, who fled religious persecution and torture in his homeland, found himself trapped in a nightmare scenario that should be unthinkable in a nation founded on liberty and due process. After legally marrying American citizen Mae Bovenzi in May and having a pending application for permanent residency, Demirtas attended what should have been a routine ICE check-in at the Edward Schwartz Federal Building in San Diego on November 20. Instead of returning home to his wife, he was arrested and would spend the next seven weeks detained at the Otay Mesa Detention Center.

What makes this case particularly disturbing is the series of judicial decisions that should have prevented this injustice. On December 30, an immigration judge ruled that Demirtas could be released on bond. Yet he remained imprisoned. It took a federal district judge granting a habeas corpus petition—a fundamental constitutional protection against unlawful detention—to finally secure his release on January 9. The fact that a habeas corpus petition was necessary for a man with no criminal record, married to an American citizen, and fleeing documented persecution reveals how deeply broken the system has become.

The Broader Context: A System Designed to Break Spirits

The Demirtas case occurs within a disturbing pattern of policy changes that have transformed immigration enforcement from a system of justice into what attorneys describe as a “war of attrition.” In July 2025, the administration implemented a directive requiring mandatory detention for nearly all non-citizens entering without authorization, regardless of their individual circumstances or legal claims. This policy represents a radical departure from America’s tradition of case-by-case adjudication and respect for individual rights.

The administration has simultaneously gutted the immigration court system itself. According to the National Association of Immigration Judges, over 100 immigration judges have been fired nationwide since January 2025. In California alone, more than a quarter of federal immigration judges have been dismissed, retired, or resigned. San Francisco has lost at least 12 immigration judges without clear explanations, exacerbating a backlog of 100,000 cases in that region. This deliberate crippling of the judiciary creates a system where justice becomes inaccessible, and detention becomes indefinite.

The human cost of these policies is staggering. In September 2025, 7,079 immigration cases nationwide concluded with voluntary departure—the highest monthly figure ever recorded according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Immigration attorney Matthew Holt notes that many clients with valid claims are simply giving up, stating before hearings: “I want a deportation order. I want to leave. I can’t take it anymore.” This surrender isn’t about the weakness of their cases but about the psychological toll of a system designed to break human spirit.

The Constitutional Crisis Unfolding in Our Courts

What makes the Demirtas case particularly alarming is how it demonstrates the administration’s disregard for constitutional safeguards. Habeas corpus—the centuries-old right to challenge unlawful imprisonment—has become a necessary tool for immigrants caught in a system that no longer respects basic due process. According to habeasdockets.org, hundreds of habeas corpus petitions were filed in Southern California alone in 2025, with thousands filed nationally for detained immigrants.

The effectiveness of these petitions reveals how far current policies have strayed from constitutional norms. Federal District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan recently noted that immigrants have won their habeas corpus petitions in 350 of 362 cases in federal district courts nationwide. He observed that “160 different judges, in approximately 50 different courts spread throughout the United States” have issued these rulings. When federal judges across the political spectrum consistently rule against administration policies, we’re witnessing not just policy disagreements but a fundamental conflict with constitutional principles.

The administration’s response to this judicial pushback has been equally concerning. Rather than respecting these rulings, the Department of Justice has begun advertising vacancies for “deportation judges” and temporarily assigning military lawyers to act as judges in immigration cases—a move that some experts believe may violate the Posse Comitatus Act limiting military involvement in domestic law enforcement.

The Human Toll: Beyond Statistics and Policy Debates

Behind the legal arguments and policy discussions are real human beings whose lives are being destroyed. Mae Bovenzi’s words after her husband’s release should haunt every American who values family and freedom: “We grew a lot in this process, but we lost a lot emotionally and mentally. I hope our mental health normalizes. I feel like we’ve been misinformed a lot and I’ve seen with my own eyes how our constitutional rights are being taken away from us.”

Demirtas’s own trauma was palpable upon his release: “My body didn’t want to fall asleep last night because I was afraid of dreaming that I was in jail again.” This psychological damage inflicted by unnecessary detention represents a moral failing that cannot be justified by any immigration enforcement objective.

The financial cost is also worth noting—ICE spends approximately $217 per day to detain someone in San Diego, meaning taxpayers paid around $10,416 to detain Demirtas before his eventual release. This represents not just a moral failure but a fiscal irresponsibility, detaining people who pose no threat and have strong legal claims to remain.

The Assault on American Values and Institutions

What we’re witnessing goes beyond immigration policy—it’s an assault on the very institutions and principles that define American democracy. The systematic weakening of the immigration judiciary, the disregard for habeas corpus, and the implementation of policies designed to exhaust rather than administer justice represent a fundamental threat to our system of government.

The administration’s approach treats constitutional rights as inconveniences rather than foundational principles. When Tricia McLaughlin, Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, insists that “having a pending application with USCIS or the possibility of being eligible for a green card does not give anyone legal status,” she’s technically correct but morally bankrupt. This statement ignores the context of a man fleeing persecution, married to an American, with no criminal record—precisely the type of person our system should protect.

The Path Forward: Reclaiming Our Constitutional Soul

The consistent rulings by federal judges against these detention policies provide a roadmap for restoration. When 160 different judges across 50 courts agree that current practices violate fundamental rights, it’s not evidence of judicial activism but of systematic constitutional violation by the executive branch.

We must recognize that immigration enforcement and constitutional rights are not mutually exclusive. A system that respects due process, provides timely adjudication, and treats individuals with dignity can still effectively enforce immigration laws. The current approach—characterized by mass detention, judicial dismantling, and psychological warfare—betrays American values while failing to achieve any legitimate policy objective.

The Demirtas case should serve as a wake-up call to all Americans who believe in limited government, constitutional rights, and the rule of law. When any administration can detain people indefinitely without meaningful review, when courts are systematically weakened to prevent oversight, and when policies are designed to break spirits rather than administer justice, we’ve strayed dangerously far from our democratic foundations.

Our commitment to freedom and liberty requires that we confront this erosion of constitutional protections before the damage becomes irreparable. The soul of American democracy depends on maintaining a system where no one—citizen or immigrant—faces the prospect of indefinite detention without meaningful recourse. The case of Idris Demirtas isn’t just about immigration policy; it’s about whether America will remain true to the constitutional principles that have defined our nation for nearly 250 years.