Supreme Court lets Trump resume migrant deportations abroad
3 Min Read
The Supreme Court’s decision revives Trump-era deportation tactics, drawing backlash over human rights concerns and due process implications for migrants.
-
Migrants who were deported from the US to Mexico wave as they are transported to a shelter in Tijuana, Mexico, late Tuesday, January 21, 2025. (AP)
The US Supreme Court has cleared the Trump administration to restart deporting migrants to third countries, including those with unstable conditions such as South Sudan.
In a brief, unsigned order, the court's conservative majority paused a lower court ruling that had required the government to provide migrants a "meaningful opportunity" to contest their removal if they faced threats like torture or persecution. No explanation was given, but the decision allows deportations to continue while the appeal process unfolds. Liberal justices dissented strongly.
The ruling enables the administration to expedite deportations to countries that are not the migrants' original homelands. This includes individuals held at a US military base in Djibouti, some of whom the administration had previously tried to send to South Sudan.
The Department of Homeland Security welcomed the move, with Spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin stating, "DHS can now execute its lawful authority and remove illegal aliens to a country willing to accept them. Fire up the deportation planes."
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson praised the court’s decision, calling it a reaffirmation of presidential authority to remove 'convicted criminal migrants'.
Dissenters decry ruling that risks sending migrants into danger
Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a sharp dissent, accusing the court of enabling due process violations. She argued the ruling disregards the risk of migrants facing severe harm in unfamiliar countries. “In matters of life and death, it is best to proceed with caution,” she wrote.
US District Judge Brian Murphy had previously ruled the administration violated court orders when it sought to deport eight men, convicted of serious crimes, to South Sudan, deemed unsafe by the US State Department. Only one of the men was actually South Sudanese.
Immigrant rights groups filed the case, arguing that the men faced removal to countries where they had no citizenship or ties. After South Sudan refused the group, the men were taken to Djibouti, where they remained in US custody. The individuals are originally from Cuba, Mexico, Laos, Vietnam, and Myanmar.
Reuters reported the administration had also considered Libya, despite longstanding US criticism of its detention conditions.
Murphy emphasized that migrants must be granted notice and an opportunity to express fear before removal, ruling that the policy likely breaches constitutional due process. He required a 10-day window for migrants to raise such claims.
The Trump administration countered that it already adheres to due process and that deporting individuals whose home countries won’t take them back is essential for national security.
This case is one of several high-profile immigration disputes to reach the Supreme Court since Trump returned to office in January, vowing mass deportations. Past decisions allowed the administration to revoke temporary protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants, while also identifying flaws in how some were treated.
