On September 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 to let the Trump administration resume deporting immigrants to third countries, overturning a Boston-based appeals court ruling that had blocked the practice six days earlier.

The unsigned emergency order, with the three liberal justices dissenting, grants the government's request to halt a 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision. That ruling held that the current process violates federal immigration law because deportees receive no meaningful chance to flag safety risks before removal.

The court also scheduled oral arguments for December to resolve the underlying legal questions. Until then, removal flights can resume.

What does the ruling change?

The September 23 appeals court ruling had forced the cancellation of at least one flight carrying 70 people with criminal convictions to three countries, according to Solicitor General D. John Sauer's filing. Sauer told the court that halting deportations "created substantial logistical problems with ongoing removal operations" and produced "added expense, potential diplomatic issues, and the inability to remove dangerous criminals."

The Supreme Court's action reverses that hold. Immigrants facing removal to a third country are "once again at immediate risk of being sent to places where they have no meaningful opportunity to seek protection," said Trina Realmuto, a lawyer at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance who represents the plaintiffs.

James Percival, general counsel of the Department of Homeland Security, called the ruling "a bad day for criminal illegals and open borders activists alike" and said "it's not too late to get $3,000 and a flight home."

Who is affected?

Four unnamed immigrants challenged the policy. They argued that federal law requires a "meaningful opportunity" to claim torture or persecution risks before deportation to a country where they hold no ties.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy of Massachusetts agreed with that reading in two earlier rulings. The 1st Circuit upheld his latest decision on September 23, prompting the Trump administration to rush to the Supreme Court.

The lead plaintiff, identified in court records as D.V.D., is Cuban and has severe mental illness. His lawyers said he fears being sent to a country where he would not receive psychiatric treatment.

Plaintiff attorneys allege in court filings that some already deported have been:

• Detained indefinitely
• Subjected to physical abuse
• Subjected to sexual abuse

How large is the third-country deportation program?

The Migration Policy Institute estimated that about 15,000 people were deported to third countries in 2025. Mexico received the majority of those transfers.

Other destination countries since President Trump's second term began in January 2025 include South Sudan, Eswatini and Rwanda. The Supreme Court earlier cleared a 2025 government request to send eight men to South Sudan, later clarifying that order at the administration's request.

What happens next?

The administration maintains that no individualized determination is needed because the receiving countries have pledged not to mistreat deportees. The government has said it will not move people immediately if it lacks written assurances that they will not face torture or persecution.

Plaintiff lawyers counter that the lower-court rulings do not require anyone's release from detention. The rulings also do not prevent third-country removals if deportees are given a chance to raise objections first, they argued in court papers.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in December. A definitive judgment on the legal questions raised in the litigation will follow.