Judge blocks plan to deport certain migrants to Libya, other countries


Summary

Court intervention

A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from deporting migrants to Libya or other third countries, citing due process violations and safety risks. The ruling came as officials prepared to use military flights for deportations.

Legal violations

Judge Brian Murphy ruled that the administration could not bypass existing court orders by shifting deportation duties to the Defense Department. Attorneys said some detainees were coerced into signing deportation forms without proper screenings.

International rejection

Libya’s rival governments publicly rejected the U.S. deportation plan, citing sovereignty concerns. Human rights groups warn deportees face grave threats, including torture, imprisonment and death in Libya’s detention system.


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Court intervention

A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from deporting migrants to Libya or other third countries, citing due process violations and safety risks. The ruling came as officials prepared to use military flights for deportations.

Legal violations

Judge Brian Murphy ruled that the administration could not bypass existing court orders by shifting deportation duties to the Defense Department. Attorneys said some detainees were coerced into signing deportation forms without proper screenings.

International rejection

Libya’s rival governments publicly rejected the U.S. deportation plan, citing sovereignty concerns. Human rights groups warn deportees face grave threats, including torture, imprisonment and death in Libya’s detention system.


Full story

The Trump administration planned to deport migrants without legal status to Libya this week using U.S. military flights. However, a federal judge temporarily blocked the move after both Libya’s rival governments rejected the plan and immigration attorneys raised concerns about due process and safety.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued the order on Wednesday, May 7, stating that any such deportations would violate his existing court order that bars the government from removing individuals to countries where they may face persecution or torture without appropriate legal review.

The administration had argued that the earlier ruling applied only to the Department of Homeland Security. Still, Murphy ruled that it applies to any other agency, including the Department of Defense.

Immigration attorneys filed an emergency motion in federal court, arguing that officials deported some detainees without properly screening them for fear of harm in Libya. In at least one case, attorneys said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers allegedly forced detainees to sign deportation consent forms under duress.

Murphy’s ruling emphasized that bypassing legal protections would breach his earlier directive, guaranteeing migrants a chance to contest deportation decisions and receive adequate fear screenings.

How did Libya respond to the U.S. plan?

Libya’s two rival governments publicly rejected the proposed deportations. The Tripoli-based Government of National Unity said the U.S. did not coordinate the plan and declared it would not accept deported migrants. The Libyan National Army, which controls eastern Libya, issued a separate statement calling the deportation plan a violation of Libya’s sovereignty.

What risks do migrants face in Libya?

The U.S. State Department has long warned against travel to Libya, citing armed conflict, kidnapping, and “harsh and life-threatening prison conditions.” A 2023 United Nations report concluded that crimes against humanity — including arbitrary detention, torture, rape, and enforced disappearances — had likely been committed against migrants in Libya.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs argued that any deportees sent to Libya could face severe abuse or death in the country’s detention system.

What’s Trump’s broader deportation strategy?

The attempted Libya deportations are part of a broader push by the Trump administration to expand removal operations to more countries.

Earlier in 2025, the Trump administration asked Ukraine to accept deportees who were not Ukrainian citizens, according to documents reviewed by The Washington Post. The request came despite Ukraine’s ongoing war with Russia and its reliance on U.S. military and financial support. Ukrainian officials said the proposal never reached top leadership, and the country ultimately did not agree to take in the migrants.

What other countries have accepted noncitizen deportees?

Trump has pledged to deport millions of undocumented migrants and has struck deals with several countries, including El Salvador and Costa Rica, to accept deportees. Under a $6 million agreement, the U.S. sent deportees to El Salvador’s CECOT prison, drawing criticism from human rights groups.

Rwanda agreed to accept deportees as part of ongoing talks, according to The Washington Post. Independent outlet The Handbasket reported that Rwanda received $100,000 to take in one Iraqi national and committed to accepting 10 more from other countries.

Straight Arrow News has not independently confirmed the Handbasket’s report.

One U.S. official described Rwanda’s participation as part of its effort to align with the administration’s “America First” policy, the Post wrote.

Separately, the Department of Homeland Security said the U.S. deported 131 migrants to Uzbekistan in April under a new agreement. The group included nationals of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently said the U.S. is asking other governments to take in undesirable individuals, adding, “And the further away from America, the better.”

Kaleb Gillespie (Video Editor) and Devan Markham (Morning Digital Producer) contributed to this report.
Tags: , ,

Why this story matters

A federal judge blocked the Trump administration's planned deportation of migrants to Libya using military flights after both Libyan governments rejected the plan and concerns were raised about due process and safety risks in a country with documented human rights abuses.

Judicial intervention

Judge Brian Murphy's ruling highlights the judiciary's role in ensuring deportations comply with legal protections against returning people to countries where they may face persecution or torture.

International relations

The rejection by both of Libya's rival governments demonstrates how deportation policies require diplomatic coordination and can strain foreign relationships when pursued unilaterally.

Deportation strategy

The attempted Libya deportations represent part of a broader Trump administration effort to expand removal operations to various countries, including arrangements with El Salvador, Costa Rica, Rwanda and Uzbekistan.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 70 media outlets

Context corner

Libya has been politically unstable since the 2011 NATO-backed uprising that overthrew Muammar Gaddafi. The country is divided between two rival administrations—one in Tripoli, recognized by the UN, and another in the east, controlled by General Khalifa Haftar. This political fracture complicates any potential deportation agreements.

Debunking

Both Libyan governments have explicitly denied making any agreement with the U.S. to accept deportees. The Tripoli-based Government of National Unity “categorically denies the existence of any agreement or coordination" with the United States. At the same time, Khalifa Haftar's Libyan National Army also rejected such reports, stating they "violate the sovereignty of the homeland."

Global impact

This case represents a significant test of international cooperation on migration management. Libya's refusal to accept deportees highlights the diplomatic complexities of arranging third-country deportations. At the same time, UN investigators have documented evidence of possible crimes against humanity against migrants in Libya, including murder, torture and enslavement.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the judge’s intervention as a necessary safeguard protecting vulnerable Asian migrants from unlawful deportations to a Libya marred by human rights abuses, emphasizing moral imperatives with terms like “must” and highlighting the migrants’ right to due process.
  • Not enough coverage from media outlets in the center to provide a bias comparison.
  • Media outlets on the right stress law enforcement and national security, labeling migrants “illegal” or “despicable,” and spotlighting the Alien Enemies Act to legitimize forcible removals, often portraying the judge’s ruling as politically motivated through phrases like “Biden Judge.”

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

87 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot deport migrants to Libya unless they can legally challenge their removal in court.
  • The judge stated that deportations would violate the court's order if migrants cannot argue against jeopardizing their safety.
  • Libya's Government of National Unity denied any coordination on deportations from the U.S.
  • The Libyan National Army rejected the idea of accepting deported migrants, citing sovereignty concerns.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On May 7, 2025, a U.S. federal judge determined that deporting migrants to Libya would contravene an existing court injunction that prohibits removals without providing migrants the opportunity for due process.
  • The ruling followed reports that the Trump administration planned to deport undocumented migrants to Libya using U.S. military flights, raising legal and humanitarian concerns.
  • Libya remains divided between rival factions and has a history of human rights abuses, with U.S. officials and immigrant advocates warning that the deportations would expose migrants to severe risks.
  • Judge Brian Murphy stated such deportations "would clearly violate this Court's Order," which requires migrants to have notice and a chance to contest removal to countries other than their own.
  • The court's decision blocks the administration's immediate plans and signals ongoing legal challenges to the expansion of deportation policies amid concerns over migrant rights and safety.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from deporting illegal Asian migrants to Libya, citing procedural violations in a ruling on May 7.
  • Lawyers filed an emergency motion claiming migrants from Laos, the Philippines and Vietnam faced imminent deportation without proper legal protections, according to U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy.
  • The judge's decision prevents deportations to countries where migrants are not citizens, ensuring adherence to previous court orders regarding their rights.
  • Libya's Government of National Unity denied any agreement with the U.S. regarding the deportation of migrants, stating the reports did not reflect the country's legal position.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Timeline

Timeline