Third-country decision a ‘devastating result,’ lawyer says

Immigrant advocates are struggling with the Supreme Court's decision to permit the Trump administration to continue third-country deportations. This will keep the policy active for months while they await the court's ruling. Trina Realmuto, lead counsel for the plaintiffs who contested the policy through the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, described it as a "devastating result."

She cautioned that migrants might be transported to nations where they could encounter persecution, torture, imprisonment, or other severe dangers. The administration has signed agreements with numerous countries to receive deported migrants, many of which are located in Africa. Burundi was the most recent country to confirm its willingness to take in migrants.

The Supreme Court's unsigned directive this week overruled a ruling that required migrants to be notified of and given the opportunity to contest their deportation to countries where they have no personal connections. The high court will deliberate on the case in December, which means a verdict will be rendered the following year.

The Department of Homeland Security welcomed the recent decision, with its general counsel stating it was "a bad day for criminal illegals and open borders activists alike." Such arrangements have been drawing increasing concerns, particularly following incidents where migrants deported to Equatorial Guinea were held at gunpoint and assaulted.

Congressional Democrats are promising to probe the deportations if they gain control of the House or Senate — or both — during the upcoming midterm elections.