Exclusionary discipline receives considerable scholarly attention, but the concept homogenizes practices that rely on the physical detainment of youth, such as in-school suspension, and practices that do not, such as out-of-school suspension. In this article, I argue that school discipline should be evaluated not only on the basis of whether it is exclusionary but also whether it is detainment-based. Whereas a practice such as in-school suspension relies on students' physical detention, out-of-school suspension releases them from the school's carceral control. I draw on three years of ethnographic observations and 108 interviews in a public high school to explore why and how students and adults differently evaluated detainment-based versus non-detainment-based practices. Although both groups drew parallels between detainment-based discipline and carcerality, adults insisted that detainment-based discipline was less "severe." Students, however, strongly preferred non-detainment-based discipline because it released them to relative "freedom." I explore the implications of these findings for both researchers and practitioners.