Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Deport Immigrants to Third Countries Without Prior Connections

US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor speaks during an event at Georgetown Law on Friday, March 28. - Pool

The U.S. Supreme Court has cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume deporting certain immigrants—many of them convicted criminals—to third countries with which they have no prior ties, reversing a lower court order that required due process protections before such removals.

In an unsigned decision released Monday, the high court temporarily halted a federal judge's ruling mandating that affected immigrants be granted a "meaningful opportunity" to prove they would face persecution, torture, or death in the countries designated for their deportation. The order did not provide a written explanation and drew dissent from the court’s three liberal justices.

The decision empowers immigration authorities to expedite deportations to third-party nations, such as South Sudan, even in cases where the immigrants have no connection to those countries. While individuals can still attempt to present personal claims, they will no longer be covered by the broad protections of the original injunction.

Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance and one of the lead attorneys in the case, warned of dire consequences. “The ramifications of the Supreme Court’s order will be horrifying; it strips away critical due process protections that have been protecting our class members from torture and death,” she said.

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin called the ruling a “victory for the safety and security of the American people,” asserting that the agency now has authority to remove “illegal aliens to a country willing to accept them.” McLaughlin criticized the Biden administration for allowing too many migrants into the country, adding, “Fire up the deportation planes.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored a sharply worded dissent, accusing the Court of rewarding “lawlessness” by allowing the government to ignore legal procedures. She argued that thousands of vulnerable people face violence and death due to the court’s decision, while the conservative majority focused on “the remote possibility” that the lower court had overreached.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy of Massachusetts, who originally ruled in favor of the immigrants, had ordered that those facing deportation be given at least 10 days’ notice and the opportunity to challenge transfers to third countries. He found that the Trump administration violated that order by secretly flying eight migrants to South Sudan, who are currently being held in a U.S. facility in Djibouti.

Murphy’s April ruling emphasized that the plaintiffs were not contesting their deportations in general, but only seeking a chance to explain why being sent to a third country could endanger their lives. All individuals affected by the ruling are already subject to deportation but cannot be sent to their countries of origin due to legal or diplomatic constraints.

The government has argued that persuading third countries to accept these individuals—often labeled "some of the worst of the worst"—requires sensitive negotiations that fall under the president’s foreign policy powers. Solicitor General D. John Sauer criticized Murphy’s decision as an “onerous set of procedures” interfering with executive authority.

The lead plaintiffs in the case, from Cuba, Honduras, Ecuador, and Guatemala, argued that Murphy’s order simply guaranteed them a basic level of fairness. Immigration law allows deportation to third countries only when it is "impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible" to return individuals to their home or previously designated countries.

One plaintiff, identified as O.C.G., is a gay Guatemalan man who was deported to Mexico earlier this year, despite it not being an approved destination. He was kidnapped and raped during a previous stay in Mexico. After being transferred to Guatemala, he went into hiding. The Trump administration quietly returned him to the U.S. on June 4.

The case now returns to the lower courts, but the Supreme Court’s intervention allows the administration to proceed with third-country deportations while legal battles continue.