A federal appeals court has invalidated a DHS policy that allowed rapid deportations of migrants to third countries without adequate notice. The First Circuit held that migrants must receive advance notice and a meaningful chance to contest being sent to nations where they have no ties. The ruling follows reports that Latin American men were sent to the Central African Republic without prior warning. Human Rights First criticizes the practice and notes the U.S. spent nearly $50 million on agreements with about 35 countries to accept such deportations.
Appeals Court Blocks Rapid Deportations to Third Countries, Orders Notice and Chance to Contest
Lindsey Wasson/AP - PHOTO: Immigration Third Country Deportations
A federal appeals court on Friday ruled that immigrants facing deportation to third countries must receive adequate advance notice and a meaningful opportunity to challenge the destination before being removed to nations where they have no ties.
What the Court Found
A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit struck down a Department of Homeland Security policy that allowed expedited transfers of migrants to third countries without sufficient prior notice. In the opinion, Circuit Judge Seth Aframe wrote that "an individual's right to contest removal to a country based on a fear of persecution in that country means little if one does not receive prior notice of the intended removal destination and a meaningful opportunity to contest that destination."
Background
According to the lawsuit, immigration officials routinely transferred migrants to third countries with little or no warning, often relying on so-called "diplomatic assurances" from receiving states that the migrants would not be mistreated. ABC News previously reported that a group of Latin American men were deported to the Central African Republic and were not told their destination until several hours into the flight. "I feel kidnapped," said Aristides Fernandez Garcia, one of the men, adding that the transfers violated their basic rights.
Recent Policy Developments
In recent months, the administration expanded third-country deportations after securing formal agreements with roughly 35 countries, among them Liberia, Ghana, the Central African Republic and Sierra Leone. Human Rights First says the U.S. has spent nearly $50 million on these arrangements.
Savi Arvey, Director of Policy for Refugee and Immigrant Rights at Human Rights First: "Sending refugees to some of the most dangerous countries in the world — places governed by corrupt autocrats where migrants have been arbitrarily detained, returned to persecution or subjected to torture — reflects a disregard for due process, international law and human dignity."
What This Means Going Forward
The ruling requires immigration authorities to give migrants timely notice of intended third-country removal destinations and a meaningful chance to contest those removals. It opens the door for individuals to raise credible fear or persecution claims specific to the receiving country and could prompt policy changes or new safeguards within DHS. The decision may also generate additional litigation as courts, advocacy groups and the government clarify how the ruling applies in practice.
Bottom line: The First Circuit’s decision strengthens procedural protections for migrants facing transfer to countries where they have no established connections and raises scrutiny of the administration’s growing use of third-country deportation agreements.
Help us improve.
