Supreme Court Ruling on Rapid Deportations Sparks Legal Battles Over Human Rights Concerns
The Supreme Court's ruling allows the Trump administration to resume rapid deportations, prompting legal challenges and concerns over potential risks for deported migrants.
ICE resumes deportations to 'third countries' following Supreme Court ruling
Washington Examiner
Supreme Court allows Trump to deport immigrants to 'third countries'
Washington Examiner
Subscribe to unlock this story
We really don't like cutting you off, but you've reached your monthly limit. At just $5/month, subscriptions are how we keep this project going. Start your free 7-day trial today!
Get StartedHave an account? Sign in
Overview
- The Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling enables the Trump administration to resume rapid deportations to countries including South Sudan, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
- Solicitor General D. John Sauer criticized Judge Murphy's actions, calling them a defiance of the Supreme Court's authority regarding deportations.
- Judge Murphy previously halted a deportation flight to South Sudan, citing risks of torture and death for deported migrants, prompting an appeal from the Trump administration.
- Immigrant rights groups continue to challenge the ruling, emphasizing the need for due process protections amid safety concerns for those facing deportation.
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor and other liberal justices dissented, raising alarms about the implications for the rule of law and the treatment of deported individuals.
Report issue
Read both sides in 5 minutes each day
Analysis
Center-leaning sources frame the Trump administration's actions as part of a broader immigration crackdown, highlighting potential human rights violations faced by deported migrants. The language suggests a critical stance towards the administration's authority and decisions, emphasizing the risks of torture and death in South Sudan, reflecting a concern for humanitarian issues.
"The eight men in question, who were convicted of violent crimes, were given notices of removal from the U.S. to the East African country of South Sudan -- but after Judge Murphy blocked the administration's attempt to deport the group to South Sudan without giving them a sufficient chance to contest their removal, the group disembarked in Djibouti, where they remain on a military base under perilous conditions."
ABC News"The Trump administration pushed back in a court filing, calling the judge’s finding 'a lawless act of defiance that, once again, disrupts sensitive diplomatic relations and slams the brakes on the Executive’s lawful efforts to effectuate third-country removals.'"
Associated Press"The Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Trump administration, at least for now, to move forward with deporting immigrants to countries not specifically identified in their removal orders."
The Dispatch"The Supreme Court action halts an order from U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Boston, who decided in April that people must get a chance to argue deportation to a third country would put them in danger — even if they’ve otherwise exhausted their legal appeals."
Chicago Sun-Times"The court is not being asked to render a final decision but rather to set the rules of the road while the case makes its way through the courts."
Associated Press"The decision hands the Republican president another victory in his pursuit of mass deportations."
BBC News"The effective impact of the Supreme Court's order on Monday is a resumption of expedited removals of dozens of unauthorized immigrants to countries other than their own."
ABC News"The Supreme Court's order clears the way for the Trump administration to resume deportations to third countries while legal proceedings continue."
CBS News"The Supreme Court action halts an order from U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Boston, who decided in April that people must get a chance to argue deportation to a third country would put them in danger — even if they’ve otherwise exhausted their legal appeals."
Associated Press"The decision has horrifying consequences but noted that the Supreme Court's ruling was about a judge's intervention at an intermediate stage of the case."
USA TODAY"The ramifications of the Supreme Court’s order will be horrifying; it strips away critical due process protections that have been protecting our class members from torture and death."
NBC News"The Supreme Court's liberal justices argued that the government's haste in deporting people to countries like South Sudan put them at risk of torture or other unsafe conditions."
NPRArticles (50)
FAQ
The ruling allows the Trump administration to resume rapid deportations to countries other than migrants' home countries, such as South Sudan, El Salvador, and Guatemala. This raises concerns about the safety and rights of deported migrants, as they may face risks like torture or death without being given sufficient due process protections.
Judge Murphy halted deportation flights, citing concerns that migrants deported to third countries like South Sudan faced substantial risks of torture and death. The judge required that migrants be given notice and an opportunity to challenge their deportations to such third countries to protect their human rights.
Immigrant rights groups argue that the ruling undermines due process protections and puts deported individuals at significant risk of harm, including torture or persecution. They emphasize the need for migrants to have a chance to challenge their removal to unsafe third countries.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of allowing rapid deportations. Justice Sonia Sotomayor and other liberal justices dissented, expressing concerns about the rule of law and the potential for mistreatment of deported migrants, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding human rights.
History
- 3M
3 articles - 3M
8 articles - 3M
19 articles