jailing

Morocco sentenced 18 Senegalese football fans last Thursday following disturbances at the Africa Cup of Nations final.

Senegal’s Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko has followed his country’s football association in denouncing Morocco’s jailing of 18 Senegalese fans following January’s Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) final in Rabat.

The Teranga Lions supporters were arrested during the final in the Moroccan capital, which was controversially suspended as the Senegal players left the pitch in protest against the late award of a penalty to the host nation.

Fans, in response, attempted to enter the field of play during the match on January 19, leading to the arrest of 18 people who were later charged with hooliganism and violence against security officials.

Prison sentences were handed out last Thursday to them, ranging from three months to one year, along with fines of up to 5,000 dirhams ($545).

“It seems this matter goes beyond the realm of sport and that is regrettable,” Sonko told the Senegalese parliament on Tuesday.

“For two countries that call each other friends, like Morocco and Senegal, things should not have gone this far.”

The 18 fans have denied any wrongdoing but have not appealed the sentence. Senegal, however, will seek a royal pardon from Morocco’s King Mohammed VI.

“If they do not, we have agreements that bind us and allow us to request that the supporters serve their sentences in their own country,” Sonko added.

The Senegal Football Association had immediately spoken out at the time of the sentences, describing them as “incomprehensibly harsh”.

“Clashes occur in numerous stadiums around the world, including every weekend in Morocco, without resulting in such sanctions,” Bacary Cisse, the president of the FSF’s communications committee, said.

“The treatment of these supporters therefore appears disproportionate.”

Defence lawyer for the 18, Patrick Kabou, had said on February 6 that they were still “waiting to learn the charges”.

He added that some had chosen to go on hunger strike against their detention and treatment.

In response to the sentencing, Kabou echoed the “incomprehensible” sentiment, saying his clients were “victims”.

Senegal were the eventual winners of the final after the match resumed following the players’ protest, securing a 1-0 win in extra time.

President Trump’s administration can continue to detain immigrants without bond, marking a major legal victory for the federal immigration agenda and countering a slew of recent lower court decisions across the country that argued the practice is illegal.

A panel of judges on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday evening that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to deny bond hearings to immigrants arrested across the country is consistent with the Constitution and federal immigration law.

Specifically, Circuit Judge Edith H. Jones wrote in the 2-1 majority opinion that the government correctly interpreted the Immigration and Nationality Act by asserting that “unadmitted aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States are ineligible for release on bond, regardless of how long they have resided inside the United States.”

Under past administrations, most noncitizens with no criminal record who were arrested away from the border had an opportunity to request a bond hearing while their cases wound through immigration court. Historically, bond was often granted to those without criminal convictions who were not flight risks, and mandatory detention was limited to recent border crossers.

“That prior Administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority under” the law “does not mean they lacked the authority to do more,” Jones wrote.

The plaintiffs in the two separate cases filed last year against the Trump administration were both Mexican nationals who had lived in the United States for more than 10 years and weren’t flight risks, their attorneys argued. Neither man had a criminal record, and both were jailed for months last year before a lower Texas court granted them bond in October.

The Trump White House reversed that policy in favor of mandatory detention in July, reversing almost 30 years of precedent under both Democrat and Republican administrations.

Friday’s ruling also bucks a November district court decision in California, which granted detained immigrants with no criminal history the opportunity to request a bond hearing and had implications for noncitizens held in detention nationwide.

Circuit Judge Dana M. Douglas wrote the lone dissent in Friday’s decision.

The elected members of Congress who passed the Immigration and Nationality Act “would be surprised to learn it had also required the detention without bond of two million people,” Douglas wrote, adding that many of the people detained are “the spouses, mothers, fathers, and grandparents of American citizens.”

She went on to argue that the federal government was overriding the lawmaking process with the Department of Homeland Security’s new immigration detention policy that denies detained immigrants bond.

“Because I would reject the government’s invitation to rubber stamp its proposed legislation by executive fiat, I dissent,” Douglas wrote.

Douglas’ opinion echoed widespread tensions between the Trump administration and federal judges around the country, who have increasingly accused the administration of flouting court orders.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi celebrated the decision as “a significant blow against activist judges who have been undermining our efforts to make America safe again at every turn.”

“We will continue vindicating President Trump’s law and order agenda in courtrooms across the country,” Bondi wrote on the social media platform X.

Riddle writes for the Associated Press.