On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily agreed that the Trump administration can deport illegal aliens to so-called “third countries.”
In a 6-3 decision, the justices granted a request from the administration to stay a lower court order attempting to block the president and his team from carrying out the policy in question. As noted by Fox News, the order, which was issued by Biden-appointed District Court Judge Brian Murphy, directed the Trump administration “to keep in U.S. custody all migrants slated for deportation to a country not ‘explicitly’ named in their removal orders – known as a third-country deportation.”
According to Friday’s order, the temporary stay on the lower court injunction will remain in place “pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought.” The stay will terminate if a potential petition from the government to SCOTUS is denied by the high court or if SCOTUS agrees to consider the matter and hands down a judgement in the case.
Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson would not have granted the administration’s request to temporarily pause Murphy’s order. The Court’s majority did not provide an explanation for its decision.
In her dissenting opinion, in which Kagan and Jackson joined, Sotomayor claimed the Trump administration did not “proceed with caution” in the matter and accused federal officials of “violati[ng] … a court order” when they purportedly “deported six more [illegal aliens] to South Sudan, a nation the State Department considers too unsafe for all but its most critical personnel.” She further chastised her colleagues in the majority for their decision to grant the administration’s application.
“Apparently, the Court finds the idea that thousands will suffer violence in farflung locales more palatable than the remote possibility that a District Court exceeded its remedial powers when it ordered the Government to provide notice and process to which the plaintiffs are constitutionally and statutorily entitled,” Sotomayor wrote. “That use of discretion is as incomprehensible as it is inexcusable. Respectfully, but regretfully, I dissent.”
As indicated in the order, the merits of the case will now head back to the lower courts for consideration.
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood