Short Answer:
The Supreme Court’s June 2025 decision allows the Trump administration to deport asylum seekers to third countries—places that are neither their home country nor the U.S.—even if those countries are unsafe, under the supreme court’s order permitting deportation without providing migrants with written notice or a chance to contest their removal. This means you could be sent to a place like Sudan or Libya without warning, unless you take legal action fast. Critics warn that thousands will suffer violence, torture, or death as a result of this policy. If you’re undocumented, have a removal order, or are seeking asylum at the border or a port of entry, your risk of deportation has increased. Legal help is more important than ever.
A Quick Summary of the Supreme Court’s Decision
In June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5–4 decision that the Trump administration’s policy to deport asylum seekers to third countries—even those with high risks of violence, persecution, or instability—is constitutional under existing immigration law. This ruling followed a legal challenge brought by advocacy groups and affected individuals, which questioned the legality of bypassing certain procedural protections for migrants. The Supreme Court’s order ultimately allowed the administration to proceed with these deportations.
- The case centered on whether the government can forcibly transfer asylum seekers to other countries under bilateral or informal agreements.
- The majority ruled that asylum law doesn’t guarantee protection inside the U.S., and that sending people to “safe third countries”—even if they are not truly safe—is legally permissible unless Congress blocks it.
- The Court upheld the administration’s interpretation of Section 208(a)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
This decision now clears the way for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to accelerate third-country deportations, especially for people arriving at the border or seeking protection after entering the U.S., even though migrants are statutorily entitled to notice and an opportunity to present their fears of harm before removal—protections that the Supreme Court’s order has now limited.
👉 Read the full opinion on the Supreme Court’s site
How Did We Get Here? The Legal Background
Trump’s 2025 asylum policy revival is not new. It builds on:
- 2019 “Safe Third Country” agreements under Trump’s first term (with Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras)
- The 2020 Remain in Mexico (MPP) program, which stranded asylum seekers in Mexican border towns
- A shift in Executive Branch authority, allowing broader discretion in removing asylum seekers
- The 2023 D.C. Circuit ruling, where the district court initially blocked the new third-country policy on humanitarian grounds—now overturned
After these rulings, the Supreme Court found that the district court exceeded its remedial powers by interfering with the government’s deportation procedures, and the circuit court’s decision was overturned.
At the heart of the legal battle was whether DHS must prove a country is actually safe before deporting someone there. The Supreme Court ruled that neither the courts nor immigrants can block deportation based solely on danger unless they meet higher legal thresholds.
What Is a ‘Third Country Deportation’?
A third-country deportation is when the U.S. sends an asylum seeker to a country that is neither their homeland nor the U.S. Deportation can occur to any country willing to accept the migrant.
This policy applies to:
- Border arrivals and port-of-entry asylum seekers
- People in expedited removal
- Individuals with pending asylum cases or removal orders
Examples of countries potentially used for third-country deportations include:
- Libya
- Sudan
- El Salvador
- Guatemala
- Honduras
- Colombia
- Morocco
- Panama
The U.S. may not notify immigrants in advance of where they’ll be sent. Agreements may be secret or informal. Even people with strong persecution claims may be told they must seek asylum in the third country instead, despite the risks involved in such a deportation.
What Legal Rights Do I Still Have?
Migrants are constitutionally and statutorily entitled to have the government provide notice and a meaningful opportunity to present their fears, such as torture or persecution, before deportation. However, the Supreme Court’s decision has curtailed these protections.
Even after the Supreme Court ruling, immigrants still have some rights:
- You can request a “reasonable fear” or “credible fear” interview if you believe the third country is unsafe
- You can still apply for asylum in the U.S. if you fall within limited exceptions
- You have the right to appeal or seek review in federal court if DHS violates its own procedures
- You can still seek protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) or withholding of removal if you fear torture or persecution anywhere
But the window for protection is shrinking, and the standards are high. A quick removal may happen within hours or days of your encounter with immigration authorities.
👉 Know Your Rights at the Border – ACLU
What Are My Options If I’m Affected?
If you’re at risk of being deported to a third country, take action fast. The Supreme Court’s recent decision granted the government emergency relief, allowing it to quickly resume removals.
- Talk to an immigration lawyer immediately
- Document your fear of harm in the third country (photos, medical reports, police reports).
- File for emergency stays or humanitarian protection.
- Seek asylum alternatives, such as:
- Withholding of Removal
- Protection under CAT
- U-visas, T-visas, or Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) if eligible
Deportation planes are now being used to expedite the process, so time is critical.
Special Note for U.S.-Based Family:
If your loved one is at risk, help them gather documents and connect with legal aid groups. Family advocacy can delay or block deportation in some cases.
What Happens Next in Court and Policy?
Even though the Supreme Court upheld the policy, litigation continues in other forms:
- A new class-action lawsuit filed in the Ninth Circuit represents class members challenging the third country removal process, specifically deportations to non-signatory countries (those with no formal agreement)
- Immigration advocates are pushing Congress to pass protections for asylum seekers at ports of entry
- The United Nations and other human rights groups are investigating possible international law violations
Other policy developments may include:
- Expansion of “safe third country” deals with North African and Latin American countries, with foreign policy considerations and State Department travel advisories influencing which countries are selected for deportation
- Crackdowns at airports and CBP preclearance zones
- Broader use of expedited removal powers, even in interior U.S. cities
👉 ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations
FAQs on the Supreme Court’s Decision Allowing Trump to Deport Immigrants to Third Countries
What does the Supreme Court decision actually say?The decision upholds the Trump administration’s authority to deport asylum seekers to third countries—countries other than their home country or the U.S.—even if the deported individuals fear persecution in those countries. The Court ruled that such transfers are lawful under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) if the government claims the third country is “safe.” Justice Sonia Sotomayor and the three liberal justices dissented, arguing that the court rewards noncompliance and is rewarding lawlessness by the federal government, allowing removals even when legal procedures have been openly flouted.
Who can be deported to a third country under this policy?Asylum seekers at the U.S. border or ports of entry, individuals in expedited removal proceedings, and people with pending asylum claims or removal orders are all vulnerable. Even families, children, and those with Temporary Protected Status (TPS) or parole may be affected under certain circumstances. The policy was implemented under President Donald Trump and defended in court by the Solicitor General.
What is a ‘third country deportation’?A third country deportation involves sending an immigrant to a country that is neither their country of origin nor the U.S. It is based on the idea that the third country can offer adequate protection or allow the person to seek asylum there instead.
Do I have to agree to be deported to a third country?No. The policy allows for forced transfer, meaning you do not have to consent. However, you may have limited legal recourse once a removal order is issued unless you assert specific legal protections immediately.
Can I be deported to a country I have never been to before?Yes. Under this policy, the U.S. can deport someone to a third country even if the person has no family, history, or connection to that country and has never set foot there.
Are there any limits on which countries the U.S. can send asylum seekers to?There are few clear limits. While the INA references “safe third countries,” the U.S. government can unilaterally deem a country “safe,” even if it has a record of instability, human rights abuses, or lacks a functioning asylum system. The Supreme Court’s order allows deportation even if there is only a remote possibility of harm to the migrant in the third country.
Could I be deported to a country with active war or persecution, like Sudan or Libya?Yes. Critics of the policy warn that countries such as Sudan or Libya—where armed conflict, political instability, or weak asylum infrastructure exist—could still be used as deportation destinations under bilateral or informal arrangements. Deportations to countries like South Sudan have raised concerns about the risk that migrants will suffer violence or persecution after removal.
Does the U.S. need an agreement with a third country before deporting someone there?No. The Supreme Court decision allows the U.S. to carry out third-country deportations even in the absence of formal agreements, provided the government asserts the country is “safe.”
Will I be notified before being deported to a third country?Not necessarily. Many people may receive limited or no notice about their transfer, especially if they are in expedited removal or detained without counsel. Under the Supreme Court’s order, the government is not required to provide written notice or a meaningful opportunity to respond before deportation, and there is no obligation for the government to provide notice in these cases.
What legal options do I have to stop a third country deportation?You can request a credible or reasonable fear interview, file for withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture, and seek legal review in federal court. These options must be exercised quickly and often require legal representation. The original lower court ruling, issued by Judge Murphy (District Judge Brian Murphy), granted an injunction in a legal challenge brought by eight migrants, but the Supreme Court later stayed that order.
Can I still apply for asylum in the U.S. if a third country is involved?Yes, but only in limited cases. If you can prove that the third country is not safe or that you would face torture or persecution there, you may still qualify under certain exceptions. Otherwise, your asylum application may be denied or transferred.
Does this ruling affect green card holders or people with TPS or DACA?It could. If someone with a green card, TPS, or DACA is detained and placed in removal proceedings for a legal or technical violation, they could theoretically be subject to this policy. It does not automatically apply, but the risks are higher in 2025 due to aggressive enforcement. Criminal convictions or being labeled as criminal illegal aliens can increase the risk of being targeted for third country deportation.
What happens to families and unaccompanied children under this policy?Families may be deported together or separated, and children may be transferred alone to a third country. The policy applies broadly, but certain protections under U.S. child welfare and immigration law may still apply to unaccompanied minors.
Are immigration courts involved in third country deportation decisions?In many cases, no. If someone is subject to expedited removal, there may be no formal hearing before deportation occurs. However, if legal challenges are filed quickly, federal courts may become involved. Immigration proceedings may be bypassed, and the application of federal law and judicially created procedures is at issue in these cases.
Can I appeal a decision to deport me to a third country?You can attempt to appeal or file a petition for review in federal court, but time limits are strict. Many people are removed before they can secure legal help unless they act quickly. The Supreme Court found that the district court exceeded its remedial powers when it issued a nationwide injunction against the policy.
How quickly can deportation to a third country happen?In some cases, within 24 to 72 hours of apprehension. There is often no meaningful opportunity to consult with a lawyer or family before deportation occurs. The government has openly flouted court orders in the past and used deportation planes to expedite removals.
Are there countries that are completely exempt from being used as third countries?No countries are categorically exempt under the ruling. The administration has broad discretion to designate which countries can be used.
What should I do if I fear deportation to a third country?Seek legal help immediately, assert fear of harm during any DHS or CBP interaction, and gather documentation to support your claim. You may need to request a fear interview or file emergency relief in court.
Can U.S. citizens do anything to help family members at risk?Yes. U.S. citizens can hire attorneys, assist in gathering evidence, raise media attention, and submit humanitarian parole or sponsorship requests on behalf of detained loved ones.
Is this policy permanent?Not necessarily. While upheld by the Supreme Court, future presidential administrations or Congress could revoke or restrict this policy. Ongoing legal challenges in lower courts and changes in federal law or foreign policy could also alter or end the policy.
Where can I find help if I or a loved one may be affected?Start with:
- A trusted immigration attorney
- Nonprofit legal aid groups
- Asylum and refugee service organizations
Act quickly to avoid irreversible outcomes.
How to Find Legal Help for Asylum Now
The Supreme Court decision increases urgent demand for legal assistance. Many immigrants mistakenly accept deportation or miss key legal options without knowing it.
Where to start:
- Herman Legal Group – Book a Consultation
- Immigration Advocates Network – Legal Directory
- AILA Lawyer Search Tool
Legal support can help you:
- Challenge a third-country transfer
- File the correct paperwork under tight deadlines
- Gather documentation to prove danger
- Negotiate with DHS for parole or deferral
Conclusion and Next Steps: What Should You Do Now?
The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the Trump administration to deport migrants to third countries marks a turning point in U.S. immigration policy. By granting the Department of Homeland Security the authority to remove illegal aliens to countries willing to accept them, the Court has paved the way for a significant increase in third country removals—even to places where migrants may face violence or lack basic protections.
This ruling, which drew strong dissents from liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, has raised serious concerns among immigrant rights groups and legal advocates. The justices warned that the Supreme Court’s order could strip thousands of migrants of critical due process protections and meaningful opportunities to present their claims before being sent to unfamiliar and potentially dangerous third countries.
For individuals and families at risk, the message is clear: now is the time to act. The Trump administration’s renewed focus on mass deportations and efforts to end Temporary Protected Status mean that anyone with an uncertain immigration status could be affected. The Department of Homeland Security is moving quickly to execute its lawful authority, and the window for legal intervention may be short.
If you or someone you know is facing possible removal, seek guidance from a qualified immigration attorney as soon as possible. Stay informed about ongoing legal challenges—organizations like the National Immigration Litigation Alliance are actively fighting for critical due process protections and working to hold the government accountable. District courts still have remedial powers to issue injunctions in certain cases, and legal challenges can sometimes delay or prevent deportation, especially when process protections are at stake.
Advocacy remains essential. Immigrant rights groups are mobilizing to challenge the Trump administration’s policies and to ensure that the rights of affected migrants are not overlooked in the name of national security efforts. By staying engaged, supporting legal challenges, and raising awareness, individuals and organizations can help push for a more humane and just approach to immigration.
In this rapidly changing environment, knowledge is power. Monitor updates from trusted sources, understand your rights, and don’t hesitate to seek help. The Supreme Court’s decision is not the end of the story—continued advocacy and legal action are crucial to protecting the dignity and safety of all migrants.
