NewsPhoto: @victorqiuphoto / Instagram
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume deportations under its third-country removal policy, while agreeing to hear arguments on the policy’s legality in December.
In January 2025, upon returning to office for his second term as president, Donald Trump announced a series of programs aimed at cracking down on immigration. One of the more controversial policies involved sending immigrants to third countries, sometimes including nations halfway around the world from an immigrant’s homeland. A February 2025 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo directed officers to review whether immigrants protected from deportation to their home countries could be detained again and removed to another country, while the administration pursued agreements with foreign governments to accept deportees.
Four noncitizens filed the class-action lawsuit in March 2025, challenging the administration’s policy of deporting people to third countries without meaningful notice or an opportunity to raise fears of persecution or torture there.
In February of this year, the US District
In February of this year, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that affected immigrants were entitled to various protections, including “meaningful notice before removal to any third country” and the opportunity to challenge removal to any specific third country. The ruling set aside the policy. The First US Circuit Court of Appeals largely affirmed that judgment on Sept. 18.
In staying the order, the Supreme Court directed the parties to prepare arguments on the district court’s authority to adjudicate the case, as well as on the legality of the Trump administration policies establishing third-country removals.
In challenging the lower court findings, the Trump administration argued that the district court lacked authority to review the claims or grant class-wide relief, and that federal law and due process did not require the additional procedures the courts imposed before third-country removals.
Lawyers for the immigrants argued that the ruling
Lawyers for the immigrants argued that the ruling did not prohibit third-country deportations but required the government to provide an opportunity to seek protection before removal.
The court’s three Democrat-appointed justices, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, would have denied the stay, the unsigned order stated.
