U.S. Supreme Court Approves Deportation of Migrants to Unrelated Third Countries

The Trump administration deported five migrants from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Vietnam, and Yemen to Eswatini, a country in Southern Africa. This deportation is part of a new third-country deportation policy. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed the deportation, but the specific terms and timing of the agreement with Eswatini remain unclear. The Supreme Court's decision allowed the resumption of deportations to third countries, impacting the administration's efforts to deport record numbers of noncitizens. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was involved in the policy. Additionally, there is uncertainty about the fate of eight men previously deported to South Sudan.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision on Thursday, ruled that the Trump administration is permitted to deport eight noncitizens held at a U.S. military facility in Djibouti to South Sudan, a country with which the migrants have no ties. These eight men, who were convicted of violent crimes, had received removal notices to South Sudan but had been blocked from deportation by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy. Murphy had prevented their removal without sufficient due process, leading the migrants to remain in legal limbo for weeks. However, the Supreme Court lifted Judge Murphy’s injunction in an unexplained decision last week, thereby removing the additional due process restrictions previously imposed on third-country deportations. Despite Murphy's claim that the eight men remained protected under an earlier order, the Supreme Court’s ruling sided with the Trump administration, which accused Murphy of 'defiance' of the higher court’s authority and sought clarification. This ruling represents another legal victory for the Trump administration’s unprecedented strategy of deporting immigrants to countries with which they have no direct ties and where they could potentially face mistreatment. The Supreme Court’s unsigned opinion emphasized that by lifting due process requirements in such third-country removals, lower courts can no longer hold the government accountable for alleged violations regarding these procedures. This decision impacts migrants held overseas in U.S. custody and highlights increasing tensions within the judicial system over immigration enforcement policies.