Supreme Court Clears Way for Deportation of Migrants to South Sudan Despite Safety Concerns

Eight migrants lost a last-minute legal bid to halt their deportation to South Sudan, as the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration on Thursday, reversing a lower court’s ruling that had blocked the transfer. The decision paves the way for the migrants—who hail from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Burma, Sudan, and Vietnam—to be flown out Friday evening.

The Justice Department argued that halting agreed-upon deportations could strain U.S. diplomatic relations, as countries may become less willing to accept migrants. The Department of Homeland Security stated the men had been convicted of various crimes, including four for murder.

The group had filed emergency claims on July 4 in federal court, arguing that deportation to South Sudan—a country plagued by violence and political instability—violates the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual” punishment. The State Department currently advises against all travel to South Sudan due to armed conflict and crime.

After a brief pause in proceedings by U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington, the case was returned to Judge Brian Murphy in Boston, who denied the new claims. Moss noted that if migrants can prove U.S. authorities knowingly expose them to post-deportation abuse, they may have a valid constitutional case.

The legal battle stems from an April ruling by Murphy blocking deportations to countries where migrants have no ties unless given a chance to voice safety concerns. Though the Supreme Court paused that injunction on June 23, Murphy maintained a separate May order, which the Supreme Court overturned on Thursday in a 7-2 decision.

The migrants were held for six weeks on a U.S. military base in Djibouti, rather than returned stateside. Neither Homeland Security nor the migrants' lawyers have issued further comment.