US Supreme Court Allows Temporary Resumption of Third-Country Deportations

The administration had asked the Supreme Court to intervene after a lower court ruling disrupted its ability to carry out what it calls “third-country” removals

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed President Donald Trump’s administration to temporarily resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own, without giving them an opportunity to challenge their removal on human rights grounds. The apparent 6-3 emergency order lifted a lower court requirement that migrants be given adequate notice and a chance to raise concerns that they could face persecution or torture in the countries where they were being sent. The court did not explain its reasoning, as is typical with emergency orders. The ruling is temporary and does not settle whether the administration’s policy is lawful. The justices said they would hear arguments in the case in December, with a decision expected by July. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. Trump administration can restart deportations

The administration had asked the Supreme Court to intervene after a lower court ruling disrupted its ability to carry out what it calls “third-country” removals. Officials said the order had forced the cancellation of a deportation flight carrying around 70 people to three countries. The policy allows the administration to deport migrants with final removal orders to countries other than their homeland, including when their home countries refuse to accept them. The government says destination countries provide assurances that migrants will not be persecuted or tortured. The administration has entered agreements with more than two dozen countries and has removed an estimated 25,000 migrants under the policy, according to information cited in the case. Most have been sent to Mexico, while others have been deported to countries including Liberia and Guyana. The policy has faced criticism from immigrant rights groups, particularly over concerns about migrants being sent to countries where they have no connections. One case highlighted by rights groups involved migrants initially being sent towards South Sudan and subsequently detained in Djibouti.

Court to decide policy’s legality

The Supreme Court will examine several questions when it hears the case in December. These include whether the administration’s third-country deportation policy is lawful, whether the lower court had jurisdiction to hear the case and whether it had authority to impose a nationwide restriction. Todd Blanche, the attorney general, described the policy as “entirely lawful and a critical tool for immigration enforcement” following Tuesday’s ruling. Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance and a lawyer representing migrants in the case, said the order allows the administration to resume removals to countries where people could face “persecution, torture, imprisonment, or other grave danger”. She also stressed that Tuesday’s decision did not determine whether the policy itself was legal. The Supreme Court will now consider that question on an expedited schedule.