US court clears deportation of 8 migrants to South Sudan despite legal fight

Business Insider

11 hours ago

Eight migrants are now set to be deported to South Sudan after a US court denied their final legal bid to remain in the United States, following a series of emergency court proceedings held during the Independence Day holiday.
A US judge has denied the final legal attempt to stop the deportation of eight migrants to South Sudan
The migrants' attorneys argued that deporting them to volatile South Sudan constitutes unconstitutional punishment given the country's ongoing instability.
The deportations align with a broader immigration policy expansion initiated during the Trump administration targeting repatriations to conflict zones.
South Sudan is currently plagued by political unrest and violent conflict, prompting international warnings against travel to the region.
The decision came on Friday, July 4, after U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy ruled that he was bound by a recent Supreme Court order, which had earlier clarified that the Department of Homeland Security could no longer be barred from deporting the men.
The ruling effectively ended the migrants' last-ditch effort to stop the deportation, allowing the U.S. government to proceed with its scheduled transfer of the individuals to South Sudan at 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time the same day.
Lawyers representing the migrants had argued that deporting them to South Sudan, a country long plagued by violent conflict and political instability amounted to unconstitutional punishment, especially since some had already served criminal sentences in the U.S.
However, Judge Murphy ruled that their claims were 'substantially similar' to previous ones he had already rejected.
Before the ruling in Boston, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington briefly paused the deportation effort earlier that afternoon. But he ultimately returned the matter to Murphy, who affirmed that the Supreme Court's guidance left him no legal ground to intervene.
Jennie Pasquarella, an attorney with the Seattle Clemency Project who represented the men, expressed disappointment with the outcome.
' Both courts' decisions today have denied them their opportunity to have these claims heard and to protect their own lives,' she said. ' That is what is so tragic about where we came out. '
Trump's third‑country deportations
Trump's third-country deportation policy began in his first term with deals to send asylum seekers to Central American nations like Guatemala, even if they weren't from there.
In his second term, the policy expanded to include deportations to conflict zones like South Sudan and Libya. These moves targeted migrants whose home countries refused repatriation. Critics argue the policy violates due process and international law, while the Supreme Court has allowed it to proceed, marking a sharp turn toward harsher immigration enforcement.
South Sudan, the destination for the deportation, remains volatile. The U.S. State Department currently warns against travel to the country due to armed conflict and high levels of violent crime.
The United Nations has also cautioned that the region's unresolved political tensions risk reigniting a devastating civil war that formally ended in 2018.
The Department of Homeland Security has stated that the migrants who come from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Burma, Sudan, and Vietnam include individuals previously convicted of serious crimes, with four convicted of murder.
A Department of Justice lawyer, Hashim Mooppan, warned during Friday's hearing that halting such deportations could harm diplomatic relations and discourage other countries from accepting U.S. deportees in the future.
This case marks another chapter in the broader legal battle surrounding the Trump administration's controversial immigration policies, particularly those targeting individuals for deportation to unstable or dangerous regions.