A federal appeals court grilled the Trump administration on Wednesday over its policy of deporting immigrants without permanent legal status to countries other than their country of origin, a policy the Supreme Court has twice allowed while litigation proceeds.
A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit questioned DOJ lawyer Sarah Welch over their concerns with the process of deporting illegal immigrants to countries other than their own, and specifically asked about what assurances the federal government has received from those countries not to harm the deportees it receives. Third-country deportations are typically sought by federal immigration officers when they are unable to deport an illegal immigrant back to his or her country of origin, either due to an immigration court’s order or for some other diplomatic reason. The case heard by the 1st Circuit started with a group of immigrants lacking permanent legal status the administration planned to deport to South Sudan.
The judges grilled the Justice Department lawyer on the administration’s reliance on diplomatic assurances to address key human rights and torture concerns related to where the illegal immigrants are being sent, asking what is in the third countries’ assurances and whether those assurances could be challenged.
Welch explained the agreements struck between the U.S. government and third countries over deportations represent a core executive branch function, and that the federal government determines whether a diplomatic assurance against torture or prosecution is credible on its own, adding that courts would not be able to second-guess that determination. Two of the judges expressed sharp concern over that stance.
Welch also leaned heavily in her argument on the Supreme Court twice allowing the third-country deportation policy to go forward via its emergency docket in 2025.
“The district court’s preliminary injunction interfered with executing the valid and unchallenged removal orders of illegal aliens who were particularly difficult to remove and intruded on areas that the Constitution and Congress have consigned to the executive branch,” Welch said. “That’s why the Supreme Court has had to intervene twice so far in this case to correct the district court’s overreach, and while it’s a pleasure to be before the court again, not much is new.”
U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee, blocked Trump’s third-country deportation policy in February for a third time, ruling it was “not fine, nor is it legal,” even after the Supreme Court had twice allowed the policy to continue in the interim via its emergency docket.
The Supreme Court previously lifted Murphy’s preliminary injunction blocking the third-country deportation policy in June 2025, issuing a 6-3 unsigned order that did not elaborate on the rationale behind the majority’s decision. Shortly after the Supreme Court lifted the block, Murphy still tried to enforce another order that built off the one the justices lifted — this one blocking the deportation of eight criminal immigrants lacking permanent legal status to South Sudan. The high court quickly rebuked him in a 7-2 unsigned order.
Murphy’s February ruling was a final ruling on the matter, which superseded the preliminary injunction that was lifted by the Supreme Court, but the ruling was halted by the 1st Circuit panel in March.
The three-judge panel that heard arguments in the case Wednesday included U.S. Circuit Judges Jeffrey Howard, an appointee of former President George W. Bush; Seth Aframe, an appointee of former President Joe Biden; and Lara Montecalvo, also a Biden appointee. Howard and Aframe granted the request to halt Murphy’s February ruling pending appeal, while Montecalvo said she would have denied it.
APPEALS COURT HANDS TRUMP WIN ON THIRD-COUNTRY DEPORTATION POLICY
The panel overall appeared more skeptical of the Justice Department’s arguments in upholding the third county deportation policy. The judges did not offer a timeline for when they plan to rule. Regardless of the ruling, the losing side can appeal next to either the full bench of the 1st Circuit or the Supreme Court.
Trump’s third country deportations have been one of several immigration policies that have made headlines, including in the most infamous deportation case of the second Trump administration with Kilmar Abrego Garcia. The Trump administration has said it wants to send Abrego Garcia to Liberia, but a federal judge in Maryland has stalled the process and claimed officials have made “false assertions” about her prior rulings to an appeals court.