US Supreme Court greenlights Trump-era deportations to third countries
The court overturned a lower court’s ruling that had barred such removals unless migrants were first given a chance to explain why deportation to a third country could be dangerous.
In a controversial 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has paved the way for the Trump administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their native homelands—even where they face possible harm.
The court overturned a lower court’s ruling that had barred such removals unless migrants were first given a chance to explain why deportation to a third country could be dangerous. The decision has sparked fierce criticism from immigration advocates and liberal justices, who accused the majority of enabling human rights violations.
The case centered on eight migrants from countries including Myanmar, South Sudan, and Mexico. In May, they were deported on a plane reportedly bound for South Sudan, despite an earlier order from a Massachusetts federal judge, Brian Murphy, requiring the government to give them an opportunity to raise concerns about torture or death in third countries.
Judge Murphy’s ruling was challenged by the Trump administration, which labeled the deportees "the worst of the worst," citing alleged violent crimes like murder and armed robbery. However, attorneys for the migrants said many of them had no criminal records at all.
The Supreme Court’s unsigned majority opinion was met with a blistering dissent from Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Sotomayor called the decision “incomprehensible and inexcusable,” warning that it prioritizes procedural technicalities over human lives.
Immigration officials welcomed the ruling. Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin declared it "a victory for the safety and security of the American people" and added: “Fire up the deportation planes.”
Behind the scenes, the Biden-appointed Judge Murphy had forced immigration officers to hold the migrants temporarily in Djibouti, where the U.S. has a military base. The administration claimed the situation created logistical nightmares, including the makeshift detention of detainees in a converted conference room.
U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer told the court that deporting certain individuals to their home countries is nearly impossible when those nations refuse to accept them—leaving the U.S. to deal with violent offenders. However, immigration advocates argue that painting all deportees with the same brush is both unjust and dangerous.
Trina Realmuto, head of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, called the ruling “horrifying,” adding that it opens the door for the government to return vulnerable individuals to countries where they could face torture or even death.
This ruling adds to a string of recent legal victories for former President Trump in his ongoing push to tighten immigration policies. Just weeks earlier, the Supreme Court allowed the termination of protections for Venezuelan nationals and upheld a pause on a humanitarian program for migrants from several Latin American countries.
