By Andrew Chung and Nate Raymond
Sept 24 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s administration asked the US Supreme Court on Thursday to allow it to continue to deport migrants to countries other than their own without offering them the chance to show the harms they may face — a key tool in his immigration crackdown.
The administration in an emergency filing asked the justices to put on hold Boston-based US District Judge Brian Murphy’s ruling that the Department of Homeland Security’s policy to remove migrants to so-called third countries is unlawful, while it appeals to the Supreme Court.
The dispute escalated quickly after the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld Murphy’s decision on September 18, put that decision into effect late on Wednesday.
More than 25,000 migrants have been deported to 29 countries under the policy implemented last year, according to a tally by human rights groups, with the vast majority going to Mexico.
The Supreme Court previously sided with the administration, lifting a preliminary order that Murphy issued earlier in the case halting the removals.
The policy is one of a number of measures the administration has taken in its pursuit of Trump’s goal of mass deportation. The Republican president has enforced a sweeping crackdown on immigration — among his top priorities — since returning to office last year.
The administration has carried out third-country deportations to politically unstable South Sudan, which the US State Department urges Americans to avoid due to the risks of crime, kidnapping and armed conflict, as well as Uganda, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, the Central African Republic, and other nations.
In its filing on Thursday, the Justice Department told the Supreme Court that the rulings by lower courts disrupt “an essential tool to remove certain aliens, including some of the worst criminal aliens.”
The Justice Department said the administration already has canceled flights or plans for removals to various countries, and warned of harms to diplomatic arrangements and US foreign policy.
“While certain aliens may benefit from stalling their removal, the nation does not,” the filing stated.
Trina Realmuto, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said in an interview the fact that the administration opted to take the case to the Supreme Court was not surprising, as “they have repeatedly and publicly stated an intention to do so.”
Realmuto said the 1st Circuit’s order on Wednesday night “makes crystal clear no flights or buses should carry out third-country removals.”
STEPPING UP DEPORTATIONS
The case began in 2025 after the Department of Homeland Security moved to step up deportations of migrants who cannot be returned to any country listed on their deportation orders. Immigrant rights groups filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of a group of migrants seeking to prevent their removal to such third countries without notice and a chance to assert the harms they could face.
The policy provided that migrants could be swiftly removed to third countries that have provided credible diplomatic assurance that they will not persecute or torture the individuals. For countries that have not provided such assurance, deportees would be notified of their destination and US authorities would assess the likelihood of persecution or torture only if the individual raises such fear on their own.
In February, Murphy ruled that the policy violates immigration law procedures and due process protections under the US Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. Due process generally requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking certain adverse actions.
The administration has said these deportations are needed to expel migrants who commit crimes and are considered “some of the worst of the worst illegal aliens in this country” because their countries of origin are often unwilling to take them back.
But both Murphy and critics of the administration said the policy is also targeting migrants who had been granted legal protection from being sent back to their home countries.
The policy has resulted in deportees being unlawfully transferred by third countries back to their home countries, while others have been abused, detained or have disappeared, the plaintiffs said in a court filing.
The 1st Circuit upheld most of the judge’s ruling on September 18. On Wednesday, at the behest of the plaintiffs, the 1st Circuit dissolved a pause it had placed on Murphy’s ruling during the Justice Department’s appeal.
The 1st Circuit acted after the challengers to the policy reported that the government had planned to fly a group of migrants to several countries in Africa on Thursday.
The case has been hotly contested since it began, and included findings by Murphy that the government “repeatedly violated, or attempted to violate” his orders.
Murphy in 2025 found that the administration had violated his order requiring additional steps before attempting to send a group of migrants to South Sudan.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Additional reporting by Nate Raymond and Katharine Jackson; Editing by Will Dunham)
Comments