The Supreme Court just handed the Trump administration a green light to deport foreigners to countries they’ve never called home. On Monday, the court lifted a federal judge’s order that had demanded “meaningful” notice and objection rights for immigrants facing third-country deportations, as Politico reports. This ruling is a win for those who believe in enforcing borders over coddling lawbreakers.
The decision allows the administration to send immigrants to nations like Libya or South Sudan, even if they lack ties there, streamlining mass deportation plans. It overturned U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy’s nationwide injunction, which had slowed the process. The court’s majority did not explain, leaving liberals fuming and conservatives cheering.
Judge Murphy, a Biden appointee, first threw a wrench in deportations back in March with a temporary restraining order. Immigrants had sued, claiming sudden destination changes violated their rights. Murphy’s preliminary injunction extended those protections, but the Supreme Court’s ruling now clips his wings.
“Fire up the deportation planes,” crowed Tricia McLaughlin, a Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman. Her enthusiasm reflects a no-nonsense approach to immigration enforcement that’s long overdue. Progressive hand-wringing over deportee discomfort doesn’t change the need for order at the border.
Last month, the administration tried to deport seven men to South Sudan, a country they barely knew. They were notified only the night before, with no details about the conditions in South Sudan. Murphy halted their flight during a stopover in Djibouti, flexing judicial muscle to pause the process.
Trump officials cried foul, holding a press conference to blast Murphy and falsely claiming he stranded ICE officers in danger. Murphy shot back, clarifying the men could return to the U.S. for proper notice and legal counsel. The administration, caught flat-footed, asked to handle the process in Djibouti instead.
“Abuse” of judicial power, Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the Supreme Court’s ruling, accusing it of “rewarding lawlessness.” Her dissent, joined by the court’s other liberals, reeks of activist outrage over common-sense policy. The majority’s silence speaks louder than her sanctimonious lecture.
Hours after the ruling, lawyers for the Djibouti detainees begged Murphy to block their South Sudan deportation and bring them back to the U.S. Murphy denied a new order, noting his earlier ruling still shielded them. His stubborn grip on the case shows judges can still meddle in individual deportations.
Days before the South Sudan fiasco, Murphy’s warnings forced the administration to scrap deportation plans to Libya. His orders also brought a Guatemalan man, O.C.G., back from Mexico after an illegal deportation. The Justice Department’s initial claim that O.C.G. had no issues with Mexico fell apart when officers admitted they never asked him.
O.C.G.’s return to the U.S. earlier this month highlights the chaos of haphazard deportations. The administration’s sloppy execution gave Murphy ammunition to intervene. But with the Supreme Court’s backing, such judicial roadblocks may soon be less frequent.
Immigrants now face swifter deportations to unfamiliar lands, though they can still file “credible fear” claims to avoid torture-prone countries. These claims, rooted in U.S. law and U.N. conventions, offer a lifeline but clog the system. Expect a flood of lawsuits as deportees scramble to stay.
Lawyers for immigrants warn the ruling leaves them “vulnerable to torture or death” in dangerous nations. Their fearmongering ignores the criminal records of many deportees, like those targeted for Libya and South Sudan. Sympathy for lawbreakers shouldn’t trump national security.
Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, judges like Murphy can still block third-country deportations case by case. This patchwork resistance ensures deportations won’t be a free-for-all just yet. But the administration’s newfound leverage signals a shift toward tougher enforcement.
The ruling strengthens Trump’s hand in dealing with countries that refuse to accept their deported citizens. It’s a pragmatic move to unclog a broken immigration system. Critics who decry it as heartless forget that borders aren’t suggestions -- they’re the law.
Monday’s decision marks a pivot toward prioritizing sovereignty over sentiment. The Supreme Court has cleared the runway for deportations, even if activist judges and liberal justices keep trying to ground the planes. For now, the administration can press forward, one flight at a time.
