Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Ease Restrictions on Deporting Migrants to Third Countries
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Tuesday petitioned the Supreme Court to allow the expedited deportation of certain convicted immigrants to so-called “third countries,” which are not their countries of origin.
The request aims to overturn a nationwide injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts. Murphy ruled that affected migrants must be given a “meaningful opportunity” to raise concerns about potential torture, persecution, or death before being deported. He later specified that this opportunity must include at least 10 days for individuals to present their claims.
Just last week, Judge Murphy accused the administration of violating his earlier order by deporting eight migrants to South Sudan without proper legal process. Those individuals are currently being held at a U.S. facility in Djibouti.
The migrants impacted by the case are already under deportation orders but cannot be returned to their home countries, prompting legal questions about what procedural rights they have before being removed to alternative nations.
In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the lower court’s rulings imposed an “onerous set of procedures” that went beyond the court’s authority. He claimed the injunction was disrupting diplomatic and national security operations and undermining the executive branch’s control over immigration policy.
“These judicially created procedures are currently wreaking havoc on the third-country removal process,” Sauer wrote, warning of broader implications for foreign policy and security.
Trina Realmuto, an attorney with the National Immigration Litigation Alliance who is representing the plaintiffs, defended Judge Murphy’s ruling. She said the judge took “limited and appropriate actions” to ensure due process was upheld for individuals facing removal to unfamiliar and potentially dangerous countries.
Murphy’s original April ruling emphasized that the plaintiffs were seeking only fundamental legal protections. “Plaintiffs are simply asking to be told they are going to be deported to a new country before they are taken to such a country, and be given an opportunity to explain why such a deportation will likely result in their persecution, torture, and/or death,” he wrote.
On Monday night, Judge Murphy rejected a government motion to modify his order in relation to the eight men transferred to South Sudan. In his ruling, he noted the logistical complications of holding legal proceedings overseas.
“It turns out that having immigration proceedings on another continent is harder and more logistically cumbersome than Defendants anticipated,” Murphy wrote. He added, “It continues to be this Court’s sincere hope that reason can get the better of rhetoric.”
