Breyer, J., dissenting
common-law traditions? See Jennings, supra, at ___–___ (Breyer, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 8–10). The answer is that Congress did not do so. Ordinary tools of statutory interpretation demonstrate that the authority Congress granted to the Secretary is far more limited.
II
The statute’s language, its structure, and relevant canons of interpretation make clear that the Secretary cannot hold an alien without a bail hearing unless the alien is “take[n] into custody… when the alien is released” from criminal custody. §1226(c)(1).
A
Consider the statute’s language. Paragraph (1) of subsection (c) provides that the Secretary “shall take into custody” any ABCD alien–that is, any alien who is “inadmissible” or “deportable” under the subparagraphs labeled “A,” “B,” “C,” and “D”–“when the alien is released” from, say, state or federal prison. Ibid. Paragraph (2), meanwhile, generally forbids a bail hearing for “an alien described in paragraph (1).” §1226(c)(2).
The key phrase in paragraph (2) is “an alien described in paragraph (1).” As a matter of ordinary meaning and usage, the words “take into custody… when the alien is released” in paragraph (1) form part of the description of the “alien”: An “alien described in paragraph (1)” is an ABCD alien whom the Secretary has “take[n] into custody… when the alien is released” from prison.
The majority emphasizes a grammatical point–namely, that ordinarily only adjectives or adjectival phrases “modify” nouns. Ante, at 12. But the statute does not use the word “modify.” It uses the word “described.” While the word “describe” will in some contexts refer only to the words that directly “modify” a noun, normally it has a broader meaning. Compare American Heritage Dictionary 490
