The Supreme Court gave the Trump administration permission to deport eight undocumented immigrants who were convicted of crimes and detained for over a month on a United States military base in Djibouti to war-torn South Sudan. Of the eight men, only one is from South Sudan, and it’s unclear what will happen to them once they arrive.
Previous court actions and legal challenges
In June, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a ruling that required migrants facing deportation to third countries be given a chance to claim risk of torture. Hours later, lawyers for the eight men asked the trial judge to keep their deportations on hold.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
U.S. District Court Judge Brian E. Murphy rejected the lawyers’ request to halt the deportations, explaining that the men were already protected under a different order, so no new action was necessary.
Supreme Court reverses lower court protections
In its decision on Thursday, July 3, the Supreme Court majority disagreed with the argument that some of the lower court’s rulings, like Murphy’s protective order, were off-limits because they hadn’t been properly appealed. Instead, the Supreme Court set aside all lower court protections and allowed the deportations of the eight men to proceed.
Reaction from Attorney General Pam Bondi
Attorney General Pam Bondi applauded the high court’s decision, writing on X, “Yet another rogue district court judge has been rebuked by the Supreme Court thanks to the tireless work of dedicated DOJ attorneys. @POTUS will continue to exercise his full authority to remove killers and violent criminal illegal aliens from our country.”
Dissenting opinion
Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
“What the government wants to do, concretely, is send the eight noncitizens it illegally removed from the United States from Djibouti to South Sudan, where they will be turned over to the local authorities without regard for the likelihood that they will face torture or death,” Justices Jackson and Sotomayor wrote for the dissenting opinion.
Response from National Immigration Litigation Alliance
The National Immigration Litigation Alliance, which represents the eight migrant men, reacted to the high court’s decision as well.
“The Supreme Court’s order rewards the government for violating the preliminary injunction in this case and for delaying provision of the due process protections that the district court ordered, which included a determination on whether they had a reasonable fear of being persecuted or tortured there. All eight have such a fear,” the National Immigration Litigation Alliance said in a statement to The Hill.
The Supreme Court ruling means the legal battle will continue to play out in lower courts. Currently, nothing is legally preventing the Trump administration from proceeding with the deportations while the case is ongoing.
