WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared barriers preventing the Trump administration from deporting certain immigrants to “third countries” with which they had no prior ties.
The justices, with the court’s three liberals dissenting, granted an emergency request filed by the government seeking to block an appeals court ruling that the current process is illegal because those affected are not given the opportunity to raise concerns about risks to their safety, in violation of federal immigration law.
In the brief, unsigned order, the court also said it would hear oral arguments in December and issue a final ruling on the legal issues raised in the litigation.
Last year, the Supreme Court allowed the policy to be implemented after it was blocked by lower courts at an earlier stage of litigation. He also later clarified his decision, at the request of the Trump administration, that it applied to the eight men the government wanted to send to South Sudan.
Since the start of Trump’s second term in January 2025, thousands of people have been sent to third countries, including South Sudan, Eswatini and Rwanda.
About 15,000 people were deported to third countries in 2025, according to the Migration Policy Institute, with Mexico receiving the majority.
The Supreme Court’s action “means that people facing deportation to third countries are once again at immediate risk of being sent to places where they have no meaningful opportunity to seek protection,” said Trina Realmuto, an attorney with the National Immigration Litigation Alliance who represents the plaintiffs. “This is a huge consequence for people whose lives and safety are at stake.”
The Department of Homeland Security had no immediate comment.
Four anonymous immigrants challenged the policy, arguing that people should be given a “meaningful opportunity” to claim they could be tortured or persecuted if deported to one of the third countries.
Massachusetts-based U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy agreed (it was his earlier ruling that the Supreme Court blocked last year, sparking sharp criticism within the MAGA world.)
The Boston-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld Murphy’s most recent ruling and sided with the anonymous immigrants, citing a federal law that prevents deportations to a country where the person is likely to face persecution.
Although the appeals court ruling was initially stayed, it took effect on September 23, prompting the Trump administration to rush to the Supreme Court.
In a court filing, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said the suspension of “third country” deportations “has created substantial logistical problems with ongoing deportation operations” and has “resulted in additional expenses, potential diplomatic problems and the inability to remove dangerous criminals.”
A scheduled flight that was scheduled to transport 70 people with criminal convictions to three different countries last week was immediately canceled, Sauer said.
The Trump administration has said no individualized determination is necessary because countries it has deals with to welcome immigrants have said they will not mistreat them.
The government said it would not immediately expel the people unless it received assurances from the country in question that they would not be tortured or persecuted.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys have emphasized in court papers that lower court rulings do not require anyone to be released from detention or even prevent deportation to a third country if people are given the opportunity to raise objections.
The lead plaintiff, named only on DVD in court records, is from Cuba and suffers from a serious mental illness. He fears being sent to a country where he would not receive psychiatric care, the lawyers said.
Those deported to third countries were mistreated, with some detained indefinitely and others subjected to physical and sexual abuse, the plaintiffs allege in court documents.
Gn headline
