The Supreme Court stayed a lower-court decision that would have blocked the Trump administration from deporting immigrants to “third countries” without notice over the objection of the three liberal justices on Tuesday.
The decision comes after the Trump administration rushed to the Supreme Court to block decisions by district court judge Brian Murphy and the First District Court of Appeals that found the administration’s policy of removing undocumented immigrants to countries other than their country of origin without giving them a chance to challenge the removal was illegal.
The court ruled to stay the lower court decisions and listed the case — Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. — to be heard as part of its December session.
In response to executive orders issued by President Donald Trump directing the rapid removal of undocumented immigrants from the country, his administration increased the use of deportations to third countries. This practice occurs when an immigrant has an order protecting them from deportation to their country of origin due to fears that they will be harmed if they return. To remove these individuals, the administration began sending them to other countries, including those with histories of torture and human rights violations, and often without notice.
“It is not fine, nor is it legal,” Murphy wrote in his opinion when he struck down the policy in February.
The law prohibits the government from removing immigrants to places where their “life or freedom would be threatened,” Murphy noted. The government must also give notice and a chance to appeal a third-country removal to an immigrant facing such an action.
The case emerged on March 23, 2025, when four noncitizen immigrants going by the initials D.V.D., M.M., E.F.D. and O.C.G. sued to block their removal to a third country, arguing they had to be provided notice and a chance to state their fears of torture or mistreatment. As the case was in the courts, the administration issued a new policy allowing deportations to third countries without offering notice or a chance to challenge the removal.
In 2025, Murphy ruled in favor of D.V.D. and the other plaintiffs and granted a preliminary injunction and a class certification for any immigrant facing a similar fate, allowing them 15 days’ notice to challenge their removal.
That did not stop the administration from violating this order or trying to violate it by continuing third-country removals without notice, including by sending O.C.G., a native of Guatemala, to Mexico, even though he had testified that he had been raped there and was afraid to return.
The administration continued to attempt to deport immigrants, largely from Central and South America, to third countries, often in Africa. Immigrants deported to countries like Equatorial Guinea and El Salvador reported being tortured and beaten upon arrival.
Murphy’s February decision invalidating the administration’s third-country removal policy had been on hold while the First District Court of Appeals heard the case. That changed when the appeals court upheld most of Murphy’s decision on Sept. 18. The administration quickly asked the Supreme Court to stay that decision and hear the case.
The Supreme Court will now hear the case in December.