Trump Administration Makes Emergency Appeal to Supreme Court to Resume 'Third-Country' Deportations

Late Wednesday night, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston dissolved a stay that had kept the Trump administration's "third-country" deportation policy in motion, immediately grounding a scheduled flight of 70 deportees bound for Burundi, Rwanda, and the Central African Republic. Within hours, the Department of Homeland Security and Solicitor General D. John Sauer filed an emergency application to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to intervene and restore the government's authority to swiftly remove noncitizens to nations other than their homelands.[1][4][6]

The legal whiplash marks the latest chapter in a protracted battle over a core component of the administration's sweeping immigration crackdown. Under the policy, DHS can deport individuals with final removal orders to third countries—often nations where the migrants have no prior ties—if their countries of origin refuse to accept them.[1][2][5]

The administration maintains that these third-country governments provide diplomatic assurances that the deportees will not face persecution or torture. However, immigrant rights groups filed a class-action lawsuit arguing that the government was sending people to dangerous destinations without due process.[1][3]

In February 2026, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy ruled the policy unlawful, concluding that DHS could not remove individuals to a new destination without providing meaningful written notice and an opportunity to object. The 1st Circuit largely affirmed that ruling on September 18, agreeing that migrants must be given at least 10 days to raise fear-based claims about the proposed destination.[4][5][6]

The administration had continued the flights under a temporary stay, but the appellate court's decision to dissolve that stay late Wednesday threw the operation into immediate disarray. Attorney General Todd Blanche condemned the appellate order, stating that it was issued "in the dark of night" and robbed authorities of "an entirely legal and valuable tool to stem the tide of illegal immigration."[1][6]

In Thursday's emergency filing, Sauer argued that the lower court's mandated notice periods act as an operational veto that "would again obstruct DHS from efficiently removing aliens." He warned that without the ability to utilize third-country removals, the United States would be forced to release "vicious criminals who have already harmed our communities" back into the interior.[4][5][6]

The administration also highlighted the diplomatic fallout of the sudden halt. Sauer noted that the cancellation of Thursday's flight required immediate engagement with the three receiving nations, emphasizing that finding countries willing to accept foreign citizens is a "delicate diplomatic endeavor."[1][6]

More than 25,000 people have been deported to 29 different countries under the policy since it was implemented, according to DHS officials. While the vast majority have been sent to Mexico, thousands of others have been flown to nations ranging from South Sudan and Equatorial Guinea to Liberia and Guyana.[1][2]

Advocates representing the migrants point to severe safety risks in some of the receiving nations. In one recent incident, lawyers reported that two men deported to Equatorial Guinea were beaten and held at gunpoint by local police. The plaintiffs argue that the 10-day notice window is a minimal safeguard against such outcomes.[1][2]

The Supreme Court is now tasked with deciding whether to grant an immediate administrative stay to let the flights resume while the broader legal dispute plays out. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who handles emergency matters arising from the 1st Circuit, has requested a response from the immigrant-rights groups by 4:00 p.m. EDT on Monday.[5][6]