The government of President Donald Trump violated a federal court order by expelling two Cubans and six other migrants to a third country, specifically South Sudan, as stated by Judge Brian Murphy of the Federal District Court of Massachusetts.
Murphy stated that the deportation was "undeniably in violation of the order" from his court, as the migrants were not given the opportunity to contest their transfer to a country other than their country of origin.
In a hearing held this Wednesday, Murphy emphasized that "it was impossible for these individuals to have a meaningful opportunity to oppose their transfer to South Sudan."
This statement reinforces the argument that the government deliberately ignored the guarantees of due process.
According to the BBC and CBS News, Murphy issued an order on April 18 stating that illegal immigrants must have "a meaningful opportunity" to contest their deportation to third countries.
This Thursday, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt lashed out at Murphy, accusing him of trying to "bring these monsters back" to the U.S.
"Now Judge Murphy is forcing federal officials to stay in Djibouti for more than two weeks, threatening the United States' diplomatic relations with countries around the world and putting the lives of agents at risk by having to be with these illegal murderers, criminals, and rapists," Leavitt said.
Leavitt, who provided the names and criminal records of the eight deported individuals, described Murphy's order as a "massive judicial overreach."
"You cannot control the foreign policy or national security of the United States of America, and suggesting otherwise is completely absurd," he stated.
A disputed flight
Despite Judge Murphy's order, this Wednesday a flight departed from Texas with an undisclosed initial destination, carrying the eight migrants on board.
The spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Tricia McLaughlin, confirmed on Wednesday during a press briefing the departure of the flight, but refused to disclose the final destination “for security reasons,” and stated that the individuals were still in the custody of the U.S. government.
Later, under media and judicial pressure, he clarified that the flight could have made multiple stops and noted: “I warn you to assume that your final destination is South Sudan,” although he insisted that “that is not their final destination.”
However, court documents and testimonies from lawyers clearly indicated that the chosen destination by the government was the African country.
The migrants were identified as Enrique Arias Hierro and José Manuel Rodríguez (both from Cuba), Jesús Muñoz Gutiérrez (Mexico), Thongxay Nilakout (Laos), Kyaw Mya and Nyo Myint (Myanmar), Tuan Thanh Phan (Vietnam), and Dian Peter Domach (South Sudan).
All of them have criminal records that, according to the DHS, include offenses such as murder, child molestation, sexual assault, and armed robbery.
McLaughlin referred to the deportees as "some of the most barbaric and violent individuals."
“No country in the world wanted to accept them because their crimes were uniquely monstrous and barbaric [...] but thanks to the State Department, we found a country that was willing to take in these illegals,” he added.
McLaughlin defended the action as a "diplomatic and military security operation," and directly attacked Judge Murphy by saying that "it is absolutely absurd for a district judge to attempt to dictate the foreign policy and national security of the United States."
These statements reflect the growing conflict between the executive and judicial branches during the Trump administration, particularly in the area of immigration policies.
The government's position was also supported by the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Todd Lyons, who asserted that if a country refuses to accept its citizens, the United States has "the option to find a third safe country."
Lyons added that "his country would not accept him back" and labeled those states as "recalcitrant."
Procedural irregularities and legal complaints
Various organizations advocating for the rights of migrants filed an emergency motion with the court in Massachusetts, reporting that their clients were notified with less than 24 hours' notice and without language assistance.
In the case of Nyo Myint, a citizen of Myanmar, his lawyer Jonathan Ryan explained to the BBC that on May 19, he received two contradictory notices - one sending him to South Africa and the other to South Sudan - both in English, a language that Myint barely understood.
"I have no idea where he is," Ryan said, adding that "the United States government has made him disappear."
The lawyer also emphasized that, although his client had a criminal record, "these individuals were deliberately chosen by the government for this maneuver, to divert our attention from the government's blatant disregard for a federal court order."
And he concluded: “If we allow the government to choose who deserves due process and who has rights, we are renouncing all rights.”
The BBC also reported that, one day before the takeoff, Judge Murphy had ordered that the migrants must be kept in government custody, receive humane treatment, and have reasonable time to contest their deportations.
An expanding international strategy
The incident occurs within a broader context of intensified deportations by the Trump administration, which sought to establish agreements with third countries to accept expelled individuals.
In mid-March, more than 200 migrants, mostly Venezuelans, were sent to a mega-prison in El Salvador under a secret agreement with President Nayib Bukele, whereby the U.S. would pay six million dollars.
Other countries such as Rwanda, Benin, Angola, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, and Moldova have also been mentioned in press reports as possible recipients of expelled migrants.
At the same time, then Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the revocation of visas for citizens of South Sudan in retaliation for that country's refusal to accept deportees, which highlights the contradiction of having sent them there as well.
Frequently Asked Questions about the Deportation of Cubans to South Sudan
Why did Judge Brian Murphy rule the deportation of Cubans to South Sudan as a violation?
Judge Brian Murphy ruled that the deportation violated a federal court order because migrants were not given the opportunity to contest their transfer to a country different from their country of origin, which constitutes a violation of due process.
What was the reaction of the Trump administration to Judge Murphy's decision?
The White House spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, harshly criticized Judge Murphy, accusing him of overstepping his judicial authority and attempting to interfere in the foreign policy and national security of the United States.
What happened to the Cubans deported to South Sudan?
The deported Cubans were initially taken to a U.S. military base in Djibouti, where they remain in custody awaiting a court decision that would allow credible fear interviews to be conducted and potentially reopen their immigration cases.
What implications does deportation to third countries like South Sudan have?
The deportation to third countries raises serious legal and human rights concerns, especially when carried out without a bilateral treaty and in countries with instability, such as South Sudan, which is facing a humanitarian crisis and has no formal immigration agreements with the United States.
Filed under:
