flexibility. But the bright-line approach provides comparable flexibility; it simply comes into play at a different stage of the process. Under the bright- line approach, criminal aliens are not automatically released after six months. They are merely afforded bond hearings, at which an immigration judge, applying a multi-factor balancing approach, can make individualized determinations concerning whether continued detention is justified. See Guerra, 24 I. & N. Dec. 37, 39-40 (BIA 2006). In fact, all of the factors the majority opinion instructs courts to consider when applying the case-by-case approach, as well as any other relevant facts and circumstances, could just as well be considered by an immigration judge deciding whether to release a § 1226(c) detainee on bond. See id. at 39 (<HOLDING>). In effect, the majority opinion’s
recognizing that no bond or a nominal bond may be appropriate in cases involving the public interest holding that the ins lacks authority under  1231a6 to detain a resident alien for more than a reasonable time beyond the removal period if there is no reasonable likelihood that the alien will be removed in the reasonably foreseeable future recognizing that at a bond hearing there is no limit to the discretionary factors that may be considered  in determining whether to detain an alien pending a decision on  removal holding that an alien must be released unless the government demonstrates at a bond hearing that the alien poses a risk of flight or a risk of danger to the community holding that the decision whether an alien meets the hardship requirement in 8 usc  1229b is  a discretionary judgment