Justice Department seeks emergency Supreme Court stay to resume third-country deportations

Key points

• The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to pause a February 2026 order from Judge Brian Murphy that requires due process for third-country removals.
• Solicitor General D. John Sauer stated that the policy has already removed 'thousands' of individuals and that 'thousands more' are eligible for deportation.
• The administration claims that lower court rulings have disrupted diplomatic arrangements and forced the cancellation of flights for 70 would-be deportees.
• The First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's decision, requiring ICE to give migrants a meaningful opportunity to contest removal to unfamiliar countries.
• Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has initial responsibility for the emergency appeal and set a deadline for the opposing side to respond by September 28.

Background

This dispute follows a series of legal challenges to the Trump administration's mass deportation agenda. In 2025, the Supreme Court initially allowed the administration to resume third-country deportations while legal proceedings continued. However, lower courts have since intervened multiple times. A recent First Circuit ruling, which upheld a district court decision, declared the current policy unlawful due to due process violations. The administration has previously brokered agreements with dozens of countries, including several in Africa and Latin America, to accept deportees who are not citizens of those nations.

How outlets are covering it

The Trump administration, represented by Solicitor General D. John Sauer and Attorney General Todd Blanche, argues that third-country removals are an 'essential tool' to remove dangerous criminals and that the lower court orders have caused 'significant and irreparable harm' to U.S. foreign policy. They contend that the courts have disregarded jurisdictional bars and that the policy is necessary to stem illegal immigration. Conversely, the First Circuit Court of Appeals and the lower court, led by Judge Brian Murphy, emphasize due process rights. They ruled that migrants must receive meaningful notice and a chance to challenge their destination, particularly when being sent to countries with no ties to them. Human rights advocates, cited by The Guardian, have described the policy as 'machiavellian' and criticized the lack of transparency and the potential for sending migrants to dangerous or unstable nations. Fox News highlighted the legal battle, noting that ICE attempted to proceed with a deportation to Ghana despite the appeals court's ruling, arguing that the formal mandate had not yet been issued at the time.

Why it matters

The outcome of this emergency appeal could determine whether the administration can continue its third-country deportation program, which has already relocated approximately 25,000 migrants. A Supreme Court stay would allow the Department of Homeland Security to resume removals without providing migrants the due process protections currently mandated by lower courts. This case represents a significant test of the limits of executive power in immigration enforcement and the extent of due process rights for noncitizens facing removal to unfamiliar countries.

What to watch

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has given the lawyers for the immigrants challenging the policy until Monday afternoon to respond to the administration's emergency request. The administration is seeking an immediate administrative stay to allow the government to continue deportations while the Supreme Court considers the merits of the case. The next step will likely involve the Supreme Court deciding whether to grant the stay or allow the lower court's due process requirements to remain in effect.