WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the US Supreme Court to let it deport migrants to other countries without giving them any warning or chance to explain why they might be in danger.
The request is part of the president’s push to speed up deportations and crack down on immigration.
The Justice Department requested that the justices lift Boston-based US District Judge Brian Murphy’s nationwide injunction, which requires that migrants be given the opportunity to seek legal relief from deportation before they are sent to so-called “third countries,” while litigation in the case continues.
The administration said in its filing that the third-country process is critical to removing migrants who commit crimes, as their countries of origin are often unwilling to take them back.
“As a result, criminal aliens are often allowed to stay in the United States for years on end, victimising law-abiding Americans in the meantime,” it told the justices.
The filing marked the administration’s latest appeal to the country’s highest court as it seeks greater freedom to enforce Trump’s hardline immigration policies and challenge lower court decisions that have blocked them.
The administration argued that Murphy’s injunction is holding up potentially thousands of deportations. It said the ruling “disrupts sensitive diplomatic, foreign policy and national security efforts.”
In February, the Department of Homeland Security moved to determine whether people granted protection against removal to their home countries could instead be detained and sent to a third country.
Immigrant rights groups filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of migrants who want to stop rapid deportation to third countries without prior notice or a chance to explain the dangers they might face.
In March, the administration issued guidance stating that if a third country offers credible diplomatic assurances it will not persecute or torture migrants, individuals may be deported there “without the need for further procedures.”
Without such assurance, if the migrant expresses fear of removal to that country, US authorities would assess the risk of persecution or torture, possibly referring the person to an immigration court.
Judge Murphy issued a preliminary injunction in April, finding that the policy of “executing third-country removals without providing notice and a meaningful opportunity to present fear-based claims” likely violates the due process protections under the US Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. These protections generally require the government to provide notice and a hearing before taking significant actions.
Murphy said that the Supreme Court, Congress, “common sense” and “basic decency” all demand that migrants be given adequate due process.
On May 16, the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to pause Murphy’s decision.
The administration maintained that its policy meets due process standards and claimed the judge’s injunction weakens the president’s “broad authority” over immigration.
As with previous legal battles over Trump’s sweeping executive actions, this case raised further concerns over whether the administration is defying court orders.
On May 21, Murphy ruled that the administration had violated his order by attempting to deport migrants to South Sudan.
The migrants, now held at a military base in Djibouti, had all committed “heinous crimes” in the US, including murder, arson and armed robbery, according to the administration.
“As a result, the United States has been put to the intolerable choice of holding these aliens for additional proceedings at a military facility on foreign soil — where each day of their continued confinement risks grave harm to American foreign policy — or bringing these convicted criminals back to America,” the Justice Department said.
Murphy also ordered that non-citizens be given at least 10 days to raise claims that they fear for their safety.
In a separate move, Murphy modified his injunction to prevent the Department of Homeland Security from sidestepping his ruling by transferring control of migrants to other agencies for rapid deportation. This came after the administration claimed the US Department of Defense was not bound by the court’s order.
That argument followed the government’s admission that the Defence Department had flown four Venezuelans held at the US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to El Salvador after Murphy’s original ruling.
After Reuters reported in May that the US military could deport a group of migrants to Libya for the first time, Murphy issued a warning that such removals would “clearly violate” his ruling.
