The US Supreme Court on Tuesdaylet President Donald Trump’s administration resume deporting migrants tocountries other than their own without offering them the chance to show theharms they may face, bolstering a tool his administration has used for rapid ‌expulsionsas part of his immigration crackdown.

The court granted the JusticeDepartment’s emergency request to put on hold Boston-based US District JudgeBrian Murphy’s ruling that the Department of Homeland Security’s policy toremove migrants to so-called third countries is unlawful. The court also agreedto hear arguments in the dispute in December, with a formal ruling on thepolicy to follow.

The court has a 6-3 conservativemajority. Its three liberal justices dissented from the decision to let thedeportations immediately resume pending the final outcome of the litigation.

Murphy’s ruling came in aclass-action lawsuit filed by immigrant rights groups on behalf of migrantsseeking to prevent the US government from sending them to third countrieswithout notice and a chance to assert the harms they could face.

More than 25,000 migrants havebeen deported ⁠to 29 countries under the policy implemented lastyear, according to a tally by human rights groups, with the vast majority goingto Mexico.

The policy is one of a number ofmeasures the administration has taken in its pursuit of Trump’s goal of massdeportation. The Republican president has enforced a sweeping crackdown onimmigration — among his top priorities — since returning to office last year.

The administration has carriedout third-country deportations to politically unstable South Sudan, which theUS State Department urges Americans to avoid due to the risks of crime,kidnapping and armed conflict, as well as Uganda, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia,the Central African Republic, and other nations.

Department of Homeland SecurityGeneral Counsel James Percival welcomed the court’s decision.

“A bad day for criminal illegalsand open-borders activists alike,” Percival wrote on social media.

Trina Realmuto, a lawyer for theplaintiffs at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said the court has “allowedthe administration to resume sending people to third countries where they facepersecution or torture. That is a devastating result for people who may be puton a plane before they ever have notice or an opportunity to raise a fearclaim.”

In February, Murphy ruled thatthe policy violates immigration law procedures and due process protectionsunder the US Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. Due process generally requires thegovernment to provide notice ‌and an ⁠opportunity for a hearingbefore taking certain adverse actions.

The Supreme Court, which hasallowed a number of Trump’s hardline immigration policies, previously sidedwith the administration in the legal challenge, suspending a preliminary orderthat Murphy issued earlier in the case halting the removals. In another win forthe administration, the Supreme Court subsequently lifted limits the judge hadimposed to protect a group of men from being sent to South Sudan.

The case began in 2025 after theDepartment of Homeland Security moved to step up deportations of migrants whocannot be returned to any country listed on their deportation orders.

Swiftly removed

The policy provided that migrantscould be swiftly removed without notice to third countries that have providedcredible diplomatic assurance ⁠that they will not persecute ortorture the individuals. For countries that have not provided such assurance,deportees would be notified of their destination and US authorities wouldassess the likelihood of persecution or torture only if the individual raisessuch fear on their own.

In its emergency filing to theSupreme Court, the Justice Department said third-country deportations are “anessential tool to remove certain aliens, including some of the worst criminalaliens.”

But both Murphy and critics ofthe administration said ⁠the policy is also targetingmigrants who had been granted legal protection from being sent back to theirhome countries.

The policy has resulted indeportees being unlawfully transferred by third countries back to their homecountries from which the US had already granted them protection, while othershave been beaten, sexually assaulted, detained or have disappeared, the plaintiffssaid in a court filing.

The administration is ignoring “thesignificant harm resulting from deporting thousands of ⁠longtimeUS residents, many with no criminal history, to third countries without regardto the persecution or torture they face there,” the plaintiffs said.

The Boston-based 1st US CircuitCourt of Appeals upheld most of the judge’s ruling on September 18.

The case has been hotly contestedsince it began, and included findings by Murphy that the administration “repeatedlyviolated, or attempted to violate” his orders. Murphy in 2025 found that theadministration had violated another order he issued requiring additional stepsbefore attempting to send a group of migrants to South Sudan.