The Trump administration’s attempt to expedite deportations to third countries has encountered a legal obstacle as a US appeals court declined to halt a lower court ruling that blocked the policy. The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston rejected the government’s urgent plea to lift a preliminary injunction that limits deportations of specific migrants to countries other than their own. The court emphasized that the administration did not meet the required legal criteria to pause the injunction during the appeal process.
The three-judge panel highlighted that the government needed to demonstrate a strong likelihood of success in its appeal and show irreparable harm, as per the legal standards outlined in the Nken v. Holder Supreme Court decision. The dispute revolves around the Department of Homeland Security’s directive issued on March 30 concerning third-country removals. This policy aimed to deport certain migrants to countries that agreed to receive them, even if those nations were not their places of origin.
Expressing concerns about the ongoing implementation of the DHS guidance on third-country removals, the court also noted the potential irreversible consequences of deportations carried out before a comprehensive judicial review. Both parties were instructed to address critical legal issues in their submissions, including whether the injunction improperly restricts specific provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act and if individualized judicial review is presumed for individuals subject to third-country removals.
Moreover, the court questioned whether the plaintiffs’ claims under the Administrative Procedure Act and due process extend beyond the scope of the statutory provision. The case, known as D.V.D.; M.M.; E.F.D.; O.C.G. v. US Department of Homeland Security, lists DHS, Secretary Kristi Noem, Attorney General Pamela Bondi, and other officials as defendants.
