The Supreme Court Fight Over Third-Country Deportations, Explained

The Trump administration plans to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to allow deportation of immigrants to countries other than their own.

U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said on Sept. 24, 2026 that the Department of Justice would seek relief from the Supreme Court over third-country removals, according to The Guardian. Blanche said the Court had previously granted a stay, a temporary pause, in the same third-country deportation case. This is a plan to appeal. No Supreme Court order granting new relief has issued.

The request follows a ruling in Boston. A three-judge panel of the federal appeals court there rejected the administration's third-country deportation policy. It upheld a lower-court decision that declared the Department of Homeland Security policy unlawful. Any Supreme Court request, whether for a stay to keep the policy in place during appeal or for certiorari, a decision to hear the case in full, would now go through Boston.

That ruling came in a class-action lawsuit, a case brought for a group, filed by migrants with deportation orders. The suit tests due-process protections, the right to notice and a chance to object, for removal to countries with which the migrants have no connection. The legal question is narrow. It concerns procedure for third-country removal, not whether the underlying removal orders were valid.

The scale is now public. The United States has deported more than 25,000 migrants to at least 29 third countries under agreements with those countries. Mexico is the destination in many cases. U.S. officials have also deported migrants to the Central African Republic and South Sudan.

The courts have ruled in both directions. Reuters reported on March 16, 2026 that a federal appeals court had lifted a judge's order that invalidated the policy allowing rapid deportation to third countries. Reuters then reported on Sept. 18, 2026 that a U.S. appeals court had rejected the policy allowing swift deportations to third countries. The Sept. 24 announcement follows that second ruling.

The Supreme Court case is already on the docket as Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., No. 24A1153. The Court issued a document in that case on July 3, 2025, according to the Supreme Court. Filings state the D.V.D. case concerns the government's ability to conduct third-country removal, according to the Supreme Court. A separate filing dated Sept. 23, 2026 and captioned United States, Applicant v. Jorge Felix states petitioners challenged removal to a third country through the petition-for-review process.

The broader context here is a clash between enforcement speed and court review of removal procedure. Third-country removal involves two separate steps. One is the order against the person. The other is the arrangement with the receiving state. Lawsuits focus on notice and opportunity to contest the second step, especially where the migrant has no ties to the destination and reports potential risk on arrival.

Looking at what this means for practitioners, the next filing will clarify the exact relief sought. A renewed application for a stay would seek to preserve enforcement options during appeal. A petition on the merits would ask the Court to define what procedure the Immigration and Nationality Act and past decisions require for third-country removal. Either path would require the Court to weigh uniform immigration enforcement against the lower courts' findings of unlawfulness. For governments with reception agreements, and for migrants with final orders, planning is on hold until the Court acts.