US court blocks Trump plan to deport migrants to third countries

US judges affirm migrants must have opportunities to voice safety concerns before deportation to unfamiliar nations.

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents detain a man in the Corona neighbourhood of Queens, New York City, on September 4, 2026 [Shannon Stapleton/Reuters]

A US federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration’s policy of rapidly deporting migrants to countries other than their own – a ruling that could next go before the Supreme Court.

On Friday, a three-judge panel of the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston largely upheld a February decision that found the Department of Homeland Security’s so-called third-country removal policy unlawful.

list 1 of 3 Why are election officials in the US preparing for chaos before midterms?

list 2 of 3 US judge blocks Trump’s latest effort to limit birthright citizenship

list 3 of 3 Trump administration proposes excluding certain immigrants from US census

The case stems from a class-action lawsuit testing what due process migrants are owed before being sent to nations with which they have no ties.

Writing for the panel, US Circuit Judge Seth Aframe said migrants must be given a “meaningful” chance to raise safety concerns before removal, rejecting the Trump administration’s narrower reading of the law.

The court did overturn part of the ruling on procedural grounds, concerning whether officials must first try deporting migrants to countries they have ties to.

Trina Realmuto, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said the decision confirmed that “due process and the protections Congress enacted against persecution and torture cannot be circumvented by putting someone on a plane to a country that was never part of their removal proceedings”.

The DHS did not immediately comment. The Trump administration is expected to appeal the ruling.

Under Trump, the US has struck agreements allowing it to send more than 25,000 migrants to at least 29 third countries, most often Mexico, according to Third Country Deportation Watch, a tracker run by the rights groups Refugees International and Human Rights First.

The policy, adopted in March 2025, allowed removals with only minimal notice if officials had diplomatic assurances against persecution.

The controversial programme has reached the Supreme Court twice.

In 2025, the justices cleared the way for eight men, including nationals of Cuba, Myanmar and Vietnam, to be deported to South Sudan , a country the US State Department advises against visiting because of “crime, kidnapping, and armed conflict”.

The DHS called the removals “a win”, while rights groups said they flouted basic protections.

The Trump administration’s immigration agenda has faced a string of setbacks this month.

A federal judge blocked planned caps on student and journalist visas, calling the government’s justification “exceptionally weak”, while a coalition of 22 states and Washington, DC, sued to stop a separate rule that would let officials deny green cards to immigrants who lawfully use public benefits.

美国法官确认，移民在被遣返回陌生国家之前，必须有机会表达其安全方面的担忧。

2026年9月4日，美国移民和海关执法局（ICE）特工在纽约市皇后区科罗纳社区拘留了一名男子。[香农·斯台普顿/路透社]

美国联邦上诉法院驳回了特朗普政府将移民迅速遣返到其他国家的政策——这一裁决接下来可能会提交最高法院审理。

周五，波士顿第一巡回上诉法院的三名法官组成的小组基本维持了二月份的一项裁决，该裁决认定国土安全部所谓的第三国遣返政策是非法的。

问题 1/3：为什么美国选举官员在中期选举前要为混乱局面做准备？

美国法官阻止特朗普限制出生公民权的最新举措（共3条，此为第2条）

特朗普政府提议将某些移民排除在美国人口普查之外（共3项，此为第3项）

该案源于一起集体诉讼，旨在检验移民在被送往与其没有任何联系的国家之前应享有的正当程序权利。

美国巡回法官塞思·阿弗雷姆在为该小组撰写的意见书中表示，必须给予移民“有意义的”机会在遣返前提出安全方面的担忧，驳斥了特朗普政府对该法律的狭义解读。

法院以程序性理由推翻了部分裁决，涉及官员是否必须首先尝试将移民遣返回与其有联系的国家。

全国移民诉讼联盟原告律师特里娜·雷亚尔穆托表示，该决定证实了“正当程序以及国会制定的防止迫害和酷刑的保护措施不能通过将某人送上一架飞往从未被列入其遣返程序的国家的飞机来规避”。

美国国土安全部尚未对此置评。预计特朗普政府将对该裁决提出上诉。

据人权组织“国际难民组织”和“人权第一”运营的追踪机构“第三国遣返观察”称，在特朗普执政期间，美国已达成协议，允许其向至少 29 个第三国（其中最常见的是墨西哥）遣返超过 25,000 名移民。

该政策于 2025 年 3 月通过，允许在官员获得外交保证不会遭受迫害的情况下，仅需极短的通知时间即可将其驱逐出境。

这项备受争议的节目已经两次上诉至最高法院。

2025 年，大法官们为将包括古巴、缅甸和越南国民在内的八名男子遣返回南苏丹扫清了障碍。美国国务院建议民众不要前往南苏丹，因为那里存在“犯罪、绑架和武装冲突”。

国土安全部称此次遣返行动是“一次胜利”，而人权组织则表示，此举公然违反了基本保护措施。

本月，特朗普政府的移民政策遭遇了一系列挫折。

一名联邦法官阻止了对学生和记者签证设定上限的计划，称政府的理由“极其薄弱”。与此同时，由 22 个州和华盛顿特区组成的联盟提起诉讼，试图阻止另一项规定，该规定允许官员拒绝向合法使用公共福利的移民发放绿卡。