The Miami Herald gets it (mostly) right.

This editorial in today's Miami Herald calls "unjust" the indefinite detention of Mariel Cubans such as my client and the petitioner in Benitez v. Wallis. Among the Herald's points is that releasing these detainees is no "reward." Rather, it is their right; they have served the sentences for their criminal convictions, and are being held only because of geopolitical wranglings far beyond their control.

But the Herald oversimplifies the issue in one respect, when it says that "the Justice Department interpreted the 2001 [Supreme] Court [Zadvydas v. Davis] ruling to exclude all those who entered the country illegally and, thus, technically aren't here." In fact, Justice appears to be arguing that only those who, like the Mariels, are considered not to have "entered" at all are exempt from the Supreme Court's limitation on indefinite detention. Under the government's approach, even those who have entered illegally would be entitled to release after six months if they cannot be deported, while the Mariels, who left Cuba as pawns in Castro's political game and were processed into the United States upon their arrival (by being granted conditional "parole"), must languish in prisons. As the Herald points out, they are here, and it is "unjust to keep them imprisoned indefinitely."