WASHINGTON (BN24) — The Supreme Court on Monday gave President Donald Trump the green light to resume deporting migrants to third countries, lifting a previous federal court order that required due process for individuals facing removal to places other than their homeland.
The decision, issued without explanation from the conservative majority, came over the strong objection of the Court’s three liberal justices, who warned the move could expose thousands of migrants to “torture or death.”
Deportations Resume Under Controversial Policy
The high court’s ruling clears the path for immigration officials to restart rapid deportations under Trump’s expanded third-country removal policy, a cornerstone of his ongoing immigration crackdown. The policy allows the U.S. to deport individuals not to their countries of origin, but to third nations willing to accept them—regardless of the risks they may face there.
The Department of Homeland Security hailed the ruling as a “MAJOR win for the safety and security of the American people,” according to a social media post from spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin.
In May, officials attempted to deport eight individuals—including refugees from Myanmar, Vietnam, Cuba, and others convicted of violent crimes in the U.S.—to South Sudan, a country ravaged by internal conflict. That flight was diverted to a U.S. naval base in Djibouti after a federal judge intervened.
Sotomayor Issues Fierce Dissent
In a scathing 19-page dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, rebuked the court’s majority for abdicating its responsibility to protect vulnerable people from life-threatening harm.
“The government has made clear in word and deed that it feels itself unconstrained by law,” Sotomayor wrote. “[It] is free to deport anyone anywhere without notice or an opportunity to be heard.”
She warned that the Court’s inaction effectively exposes migrants to potentially fatal outcomes, including torture and extrajudicial violence in countries where U.S. deportations lack oversight or transparency.
Lower Court Judge Had Blocked Deportations
The Supreme Court’s order overturned an April ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy of Massachusetts, who had prohibited the deportation of migrants to third countries without giving them a meaningful opportunity to argue they would face serious danger there.
Murphy’s decision came after reports that migrants deported to Djibouti were confined in converted shipping containers, raising further concerns about the humanitarian conditions tied to the Trump administration’s deportation logistics.
The judge emphasized that while third-country deportations were not inherently illegal, due process demands that individuals be given a chance to raise fears of persecution or torture before removal.
Murphy, appointed by President Joe Biden, had also previously ordered the return of a gay Guatemalan man who had been deported to Mexico and allegedly raped and extorted, calling the original deportation unlawful.
Broader Implications of the Ruling
Trump’s resumed deportation program comes amid new bilateral agreements with countries like Costa Rica and Panama to receive deported migrants. Many of these migrants originate from nations that are either unwilling or unable to take them back directly.
The legal battle over third-country removals has emerged as a major flashpoint in Trump’s second-term immigration agenda. Critics warn that the policy undermines international protections for asylum seekers and refugees, while supporters argue it is essential for restoring border security and removing criminal aliens.
Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said the ramifications of Monday’s ruling are “horrifying.”
“We are talking about real people with credible fears of persecution,” she said. “This ruling could cost lives.”
AP
