Menu

Search

  |   Politics

Menu

  |   Politics

Search

Google Add as a preferred source on Google

Appeals Court Rejects Trump Third-Country Deportation Policy

Appeals Court Rejects Trump Third-Country Deportation Policy. Source: The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

A U.S. federal appeals court on Friday rejected a Trump administration policy that allowed immigration authorities to rapidly deport migrants to countries other than their nations of origin without giving them an adequate opportunity to raise safety concerns.

The three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld a February ruling that found the Department of Homeland Security’s third-country deportation policy unlawful. The legal dispute centers on protections available to migrants who face removal to countries that were not previously identified during their immigration proceedings.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy ruled in February that the DHS policy failed to provide sufficient safeguards for migrants who could face persecution or torture after being sent to an unfamiliar country. The policy, adopted as part of President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts, permitted third-country removals under certain conditions.

Under the DHS framework, migrants with final removal orders could be deported to another country if U.S. officials received credible diplomatic assurances that they would not face persecution or torture. In other circumstances, migrants could receive as little as six hours of notice before removal, according to court records.

Justice Department attorneys defended the policy, arguing that it complied with federal immigration law and due process requirements. The administration has also maintained that third-country deportations are important when a migrant’s country of origin refuses to accept their return.

The case has already produced significant litigation over the Trump administration’s immigration policies. The U.S. Supreme Court previously lifted an injunction restricting third-country removals while the broader legal challenge proceeded and later cleared the way for eight migrants to be sent to South Sudan.

The appeals court’s latest decision keeps the legal focus on how much notice and opportunity migrants must receive to raise fear-based claims before the U.S. government carries out deportations to third countries.

  • Market Data
Close

Welcome to EconoTimes

Sign up for daily updates for the most important
stories unfolding in the global economy.