Court rules Trump’s third-country deportation program unlawful, but flights continue

Key points

• A federal appeals court ruled the third-country deportation policy unlawful, citing violations of due process, but the administration has 90 days to appeal and has stated the policy continues.
• The administration has pledged at least $410 million to 35 countries, mostly in Africa and Latin America, to accept migrants who are not their citizens.
• The program is led by the newly created Office of Remigration within the State Department, overseen by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.
• Over 20,000 people have been sent to Mexico, while others have been deported to countries like Liberia, the Central African Republic, and Eswatini.
• Critics and human rights lawyers argue the policy is a loophole to circumvent laws against sending people to places where they face persecution, often resulting in refoulement to their home countries.

Background

The third-country deportation policy was trialed during Trump's first term but has been significantly expanded since 2025. Previous coverage highlighted the arrival of deportees in Liberia and the Central African Republic, sparking international scrutiny and domestic backlash. The current legal challenge stems from a March 2025 lawsuit, with a preliminary injunction issued in April 2025 before the Supreme Court allowed the policy to resume.

How outlets are covering it

The Guardian and The Washington Post emphasize the scale of the financial commitments and the structural shift within the State Department, noting the creation of the Office of Remigration and the use of foreign aid budgets to sweeten deals. CBS News and ABC News focus on the human impact, detailing the experiences of deportees in Liberia and the Central African Republic who describe feeling 'kidnapped' and stranded in dangerous, unfamiliar countries. While the administration frames the policy as a necessary measure to remove 'worst of the worst' criminals, outlets like CBS and ABC report that many deportees have no criminal records and were previously granted legal protections in US courts. The Washington Post highlights the controversial nature of the 'remigration' term, linking it to far-right movements, while the State Department maintains it is using 'all legal means' to remove those without the right to remain.

Why it matters

The ruling by the federal appeals court represents a significant legal setback for the administration's immigration strategy, potentially halting the program if the appeal fails. The policy raises serious concerns about due process, international law, and the treatment of migrants, as many are sent to countries with poor human rights records and active conflicts. The financial implications are substantial, with hundreds of millions of dollars allocated to foreign governments and aid organizations, raising questions about the transparency and ethical implications of these deals.

What to watch

The administration is expected to appeal the court's ruling to the Supreme Court. If the appeal is successful, the third-country deportation program may continue, potentially expanding to more countries. If the appeal fails, the program could be halted, leading to a significant shift in US immigration policy and potentially impacting the $410 million already pledged to third countries. The ongoing legal battle will likely determine the future of the Office of Remigration and the broader approach to immigration enforcement.