US Appeals Court Rejects Third-Country Deportation Policy
A federal appeals court has ruled that migrants must have a meaningful opportunity to raise safety concerns before being sent to nations with which they have no ties.
A US federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration’s policy of rapidly deporting migrants to countries other than their own, a ruling that could soon reach the Supreme Court. On Friday, a three-judge panel of the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston largely upheld a previous decision finding the Department of Homeland Security’s third-country removal policy unlawful. This move places a significant legal barrier on the administration’s efforts to expedite removals to nations like Mexico and South Sudan.
The case stems from a class-action lawsuit testing the due process rights of migrants before they are sent to countries with which they have no established ties. Writing for the panel, Judge Seth Aframe stated that migrants must be given a “meaningful” chance to raise safety concerns before removal. The court rejected the administration’s narrower interpretation of the law, which allowed for minimal notice if diplomatic assurances against persecution were provided.
Due Process and Safety Concerns
Trina Realmuto, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said the decision confirmed that due process and protections against persecution cannot be circumvented by placing individuals on planes to unfamiliar destinations. According to Al Jazeera English, the court did overturn part of the lower ruling on procedural grounds, specifically regarding whether officials must first attempt deportation to countries where migrants have ties. However, the core requirement for a meaningful opportunity to voice safety concerns remains intact.
Scope of the Deportation Program
Under the current administration, the US has struck agreements allowing it to send more than 25,000 migrants to at least 29 third countries, most frequently Mexico. This data is tracked by Third Country Deportation Watch, a project run by rights groups Refugees International and Human Rights First. The policy, adopted in March 2025, permitted removals with limited notice based on diplomatic assurances. The controversial program has already reached the Supreme Court twice, including a recent case involving nationals of Cuba, Myanmar, and Vietnam.
Broader Immigration Legal Battles
The Trump administration’s immigration agenda has faced a series of legal setbacks this month. A federal judge recently blocked planned caps on student and journalist visas, describing the government’s justification as exceptionally weak. Additionally, a coalition of 22 states and Washington, DC, has sued to stop a rule that would allow officials to deny green cards to immigrants who lawfully use public benefits. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately comment on the latest ruling, though the administration is expected to appeal the decision.
