Appeals Court Blocks Trump Administration's Third-Country Deportation Process
Appeals Court Blocks Trump Administration's Third-Country Deportation Process

Politics

Appeals Court Blocks Trump Administration’s Third-Country Deportation Process

A federal appeals court has dissolved a stay that let ICE keep deporting migrants to third-party countries without giving them a chance to contest the destination, formalizing a ruling that had already found the practice unconstitutional.

A federal appeals court has formally shut down the Trump administration’s current method of deporting migrants to third-party countries, issuing a mandate this week that strips away a stay that had let the practice continue during litigation.

The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled last week that Immigration and Customs Enforcement must give migrants a meaningful opportunity to argue they would be in danger if sent to a country other than their own. That ruling backed an earlier order from Judge Brian Murphy, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, who found in February that the deportations violated migrants’ due process rights because people could be sent to unfamiliar or dangerous countries without adequate warning.

This week, however, ICE tried to press ahead anyway, moving to deport a migrant from Peru, identified in court filings as John Doe, to Ghana. According to The American Prospect, ICE argued it could still carry out the removal because the First Circuit had not yet formally issued a mandate implementing its ruling.

The court closed that gap on Wednesday. In a brief order, the panel dissolved the stay that had let the administration’s deportation process keep running while the case worked through the courts.

“Consistent with this court’s September 18, 2026, Judgment, the March 16, 2026, stay pending appeal is dissolved,” the appeals court wrote.

The Trump administration has repeatedly relied on third-party countries to carry out removal orders for migrants who say they would face torture if sent back to their home countries.

Judge Seth Aframe, one of two Biden appointees on the three-judge panel, defended Murphy’s approach as “sensible” for requiring the Department of Homeland Security to give migrants a genuine chance to object to a destination country before being deported there.

“DHS’s proposed interpretation would deny access to that protection to a substantial swath of noncitizens who are sent to third ⁠countries with no notice of their destination,” Aframe wrote. “We decline to adopt such an interpretation.”

Reuters contributed to this report.

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

You May Also Like

Government Corruption

Updated 5/17/19 9:52am Jack Crane | Opinion  James Baker, Former-FBI General Counsel has joined Russian hoax media collaborator Michael Isikoff on his podcast, yesterday....

US Politics

I do not even know where to begin with this one.  Just when you think you have seen the worst that humanity has to...

US News

Education is considered to be one of the pillars of a successful life. Without a college degree, many believe these students will earn lower...

US News

ICYMI| If it were not for Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch, it is more than likely that the world would never know the extent...