October Term 2000 · Docket 99-7791

Can the government detain a stateless person indefinitely?

The dispute centers on whether federal law permits indefinite detention of a stateless person when deportation is not feasible.

Official caption
Zadvydas v. Underdown
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Barnard argued for Zadvydas. He stated Zadvydas is stateless. He argued the detention is indefinite. He claimed the law does not support this outcome.

    Mr. Stansell argued for the government. He stated the administrative process is flawed. He argued deportation is not foreseeable. He claimed the law requires continued detention.

    chief_justice_rehnquist_asked_no_substantive_questions_during_the_provided_excerpt.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Kestutis Zadvydas arrived in the United States as a stateless person. He remains stateless. The government detained him. His lawyers argue this detention violates the law. The government argues the law requires detention until removal is possible.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 21, 2001.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Zadvydas wants the court to end his indefinite detention.

The government wants the court to allow continued detention.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Zadvydas argues the law does not authorize indefinite detention.

The government argues the law mandates detention until removal occurs.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Does the statute authorize indefinite detention of stateless persons?

What is the maximum duration of lawful detention?

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the limits of executive power over non-citizens. It determines whether the government can hold people without a realistic prospect of removal. It impacts the rights of stateless individuals in the United States.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON