A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that the Trump administration cannot deny migrants detained inside the U.S. a chance for release on bond as part of its expanded mandatory detention policy.In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled against the administration.Four other appeals courts have also rejected the policy, although the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans and Eighth Circuit in St. Louis have ruled in favor of the federal government.The deepening circuit split raises the chance that the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually take up the case. The administration asked the high court last month to consider the case.APPEALS COURT BLOCKS TRUMP ADMIN FROM HOLDING MIGRANTS WITHOUT BOND FOR 90 DAYSThe Department of Homeland Security said it “strongly disagrees with the Ninth Circuit panel and is confident in its legal position regarding mandatory detention.””President Donald Trump and Secretary Mullin are now enforcing the law as it was actually written to keep America safe,” the department said in a statement.Under previous administrations, most illegal immigrants with no criminal record who were arrested inside the U.S. were allowed to seek a bond hearing while their immigration cases were pending, and mandatory detention was typically reserved for those detained at the border.But last year, the government issued guidance expanding mandatory detention to include illegal immigrants inside the U.S. The move was part of the president’s mass deportation plan, leading to several lawsuits by immigrants pursuing a release from custody.Some federal judges who ordered bond hearings criticized the administration for repeatedly violating their orders.The administration has said that Congress changed immigration law in 1996 to allow mandatory detention past the border and that previous administrations failed to enforce that measure.But Ninth Circuit Judge Daniel Bress, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, rejected that argument.”Although no reading of the complicated and interrelated textual provisions at issue here is without some shortcomings, the historical understanding of the statute is the better one,” said Bress, writing for the majority.DEMOCRAT COMPARES ICE TO ‘DOMESTIC TERRORISTS’ AS 111 HOUSE DEMS DEMAND TEXAS DETENTION CENTER CLOSEBress was joined by Judge M. Margaret McKeown, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.Judge Carlos Bea, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, dissented, arguing that the amendment Congress passed 30 years ago supports the administration’s position.The Associated Press contributed to this report.