Federal Judge Questions DHS on Recent Deportations to South Sudan
A federal judge in Massachusetts, Brian Murphy, challenged the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Tuesday over potential deportations to South Sudan amid allegations that a Vietnamese migrant, identified as T.T.P., was unlawfully removed to the conflict-ridden nation. During an emergency hearing, it was revealed that T.T.P. allegedly received less than 24 hours’ notice concerning his deportation, violating a court order stipulating that migrants must be given adequate time and information in their native language to contest removals.
Judge Murphy expressed concern about the implications of the deportation, indicating that if true, it would breach his previous ruling prohibiting removals to third countries without due process. He ordered DHS to retain custody of anyone deported to South Sudan or similar nations until the next court hearing, emphasizing humane treatment for all detainees.
Despite government lawyers asserting that those deported were subject to final removal orders and had committed serious crimes, the situation reveals complexities surrounding jurisdiction and custody after removal. A prior case illustrated these challenges when Kilmar Abrego Garcia was returned to El Salvador against court orders, asserting the U.S. lost authority over him once deported.
Immigration legal teams advocate for more stringent regulations on third-party deportations, highlighting ongoing turmoil in nations like South Sudan. The Trump administration’s prior negotiations to deport migrants to unstable regions, including Libya, have drawn criticism for human rights risks.
As issues of due process and judicial authority in immigration law unfold, the legal community continues to contest the government’s practices regarding the deportation of vulnerable populations to conflict zones, calling for immediate action to protect migrants’ rights.
Note: The image is for illustrative purposes only and is not the original image of the presented article.
