Supreme Court lets third-country deportations resume, with a December ruling to come

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday 29 September put on hold a ruling by Boston-based US District Judge Brian Murphy, who had declared the Department of Homeland Security's third-country deportation policy unlawful. The removals can restart. The order stands while the litigation continues, and it covers flights to countries the deportees have never lived in.

The justices also agreed to hear arguments in the dispute in December, with a formal ruling on the policy to follow.

The court's six conservative justices formed the majority, and the three liberal justices dissented from letting the removals resume immediately. Murphy had ruled in February that the policy violated immigration law procedures and the Fifth Amendment's due process protections, which generally require the government to give notice and a hearing before it acts against someone. The case began in 2025, after DHS stepped up removals of migrants who could not be returned to any country on their deportation order.

What changes for people on a deportation order

Under the policy, migrants can be removed swiftly to third countries that have given credible diplomatic assurances they will not persecute or torture them.

For countries that gave no such assurance, deportees are told the destination, and US authorities assess the risk of persecution or torture only if the individual raises the fear. The class-action lawsuit targeted that gap.

Trina Realmuto, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said the court had "allowed the administration to resume sending people to third countries where they face persecution or torture". DHS General Counsel James Percival welcomed the outcome. "A bad day for criminal illegals and open-borders activists alike," he wrote on social media.

Mexico to Guatemala: the model in practice

The US has deported nearly 2,300 Mexican citizens to Guatemala this year, and dozens more to Honduras before they were moved back to Mexico. Guatemala is the clearest example.

Guatemala's President Bernardo Arévalo said the Mexicans arrive on planes of Guatemalan returnees and are processed as in transit, in coordination with Mexican immigration authorities. They stayed less than a day, he said. The costs were covered by the US or Mexican governments.

Mexico's foreign ministry rejects the arrangement. "The Government of Mexico accepts the return of all its nationals. It therefore rejects the deportation of Mexican nationals to third countries and has no such agreement in place," it said in a statement.

Honduras has taken smaller numbers. Official documents seen by the Associated Press show 82 Mexicans arrived in San Pedro Sula on two flights on 13 and 15 August, with 35 more arriving on Thursday. Mexico took in around 12,000 deported foreign nationals in 2025, mostly Cubans and Venezuelans, according to figures President Claudia Sheinbaum released; her government has not updated them since December.

How big the programme has grown

The vast majority of those 25,000 went to Mexico.

A Forbidden Stories investigation also counted more than 25,000 deportees, but under agreements with 35 countries. Around 20,000 went to Mexico; the rest went to 27 other countries across Latin America, Africa and the Pacific. The investigation also found the administration has earmarked US$410 million for receiving countries or UN agencies to facilitate the returns.

Destinations have included South Sudan, Uganda, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia and the Central African Republic. The State Department advises Americans against travelling to South Sudan because of crime, kidnapping and armed conflict.

What happens next

A final ruling on whether the policy is lawful follows the December arguments.

Congress has made it US policy not to deport people to countries where their lives would be in danger or they could face torture. House Democrat Lois Frankel said lawmakers must step in. "No one should be shipped off to a country that is not their own without basic due process and a meaningful opportunity to raise legitimate fears for their safety," she said on X.