third-country removals – A federal judge cleared ICE to deport Jose Yugar-Cruz to the DRC, renewing pressure over third-country removal policies.
A federal judge’s order has cleared the way for ICE to deport a South American man to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, even after a court previously found there is a serious risk he could face persecution or torture if returned to his home country.
Jose Yugar-Cruz. a 37-year-old detained in Iowa. had told a federal court that he turned himself in near the Arizona-Mexico border in July heat nearly two years ago and sought asylum.. While his asylum claim was denied in January 2025. he later obtained a court order blocking deportation to his home country. based on a finding that it was more likely than not he would face torture or persecution.
In this context. his case highlights how “withholding of removal” protections can collide with the government’s broader approach to removals to third countries.. That legal distinction matters because it can keep a person away from deportation to their home country without necessarily providing a clear path to long-term legal status in the United States.
The decision cleared ICE to move forward with deportation to the DRC. a country Yugar-Cruz says he does not know. does not have family in. and does not speak the language there.. He described the outcome as devastating. pointing to the uncertainty of what happens next. including whether he would remain detained through the process.
The episode comes as the administration pursues agreements with countries willing to accept people removed from the United States even when they are not citizens of the receiving nation.. Misryoum has reported that such arrangements have been used in a range of cases. with deportees sent through third-country agreements rather than returned to their origin countries. an approach that legal and policy observers say is intended to accelerate removals and increase pressure on migrants.
Advocates and experts have argued that these agreements function as an “end run” around protections granted by U.S. judges, because they can move people to places where they may have limited options to challenge their removal in a meaningful way.
In Yugar-Cruz’s case. court records show ICE unsuccessfully sought to remove him to multiple other countries before the DRC was selected.. He was also temporarily released earlier after a court found his prolonged detention unlawful. but was later taken back into custody after authorities received notice the DRC would accept him.
A key question now is whether the government’s reliance on third-country arrangements can withstand ongoing legal challenges.. Misryoum notes that DHS has faced litigation tied to whether people granted withholding of removal must be given an opportunity to raise concerns about persecution or torture in the third country before deportation occurs.
At a moment when detention and deportation decisions are increasingly central to U.S. immigration politics, the outcome for Yugar-Cruz is likely to remain a focal point for lawmakers, courts, and advocacy groups seeking to test the limits of third-country removal under U.S. law.
In the end, what happens next for Yugar-Cruz may hinge less on his original asylum arguments and more on the legal machinery that governs third-country removals, including how courts interpret the protections already recognized in his case.