U.S. Judge Suggests Deportations to South Sudan May Have Violated Court Order

A United States District Court judge, Brian Murphy, reprimanded the Trump administration over reports that migrants were deported to South Sudan in apparent violation of a prior court order. The judge held a virtual hearing in Boston to review an emergency motion concerning migrants reportedly on a flight to South Sudan. Murphy requested the Trump administration’s lawyers to disclose the migrants’ location and indicated he might order the flight to be turned back and pilots informed of his court order. He described the situation as potentially contemptuous.

The Department of Homeland Security declined to reveal the flight’s location, labeling the information “classified,” and denied breaching Murphy’s injunction. The judge’s injunction, issued on April 18, prohibits deporting migrants to third-party countries that are not their home nations without giving them an adequate chance to appeal their removal. Murphy cited the Fifth Amendment, underscoring migrants’ right to due process and a fair hearing.

This case highlights broader concerns about the Trump administration’s efforts to deport undocumented immigrants held in the U.S. to countries unwilling to accept them. South Sudan, a nation cited in a recent U.S. Department of State report for significant human rights abuses—including torture and extrajudicial killings—was the intended destination. The migrants involved include individuals from Myanmar and Vietnam.

Earlier in May, lawyers revealed plans to deport some migrants to Libya, another country with serious human rights issues. Murphy ruled such deportations would violate his injunction.

The emergency motion detailed how migrants were on a bus on an airport tarmac when ordered to be sent back. The motion identified migrants only by their initials and countries of origin. One migrant from Myanmar, identified as NM, was first issued a removal notice stating South Africa as the destination; this notice was quickly retracted. Shortly after, another removal notice named South Sudan as the destination. NM refused to sign either notice. Lawyers claimed NM had limited English proficiency and was not provided a translator to understand the removal documents.

One of NM’s lawyers intended to meet him Tuesday morning, but was informed he had already been transferred from detention and was en route to South Sudan. The emergency filing included an email from a family member of deportees, expressing grave concern. The email stated that the husband of the sender and ten others detained at the Port Isabel Detention Center in Texas were deported to South Africa or Sudan against their will.

The family member feared for their safety, noting the group includes people from Laos, Thailand, Pakistan, Korea, and Mexico. The plea requested urgent help, emphasizing that such forced deportations should not be allowed.

Judge Murphy’s actions reflect judicial scrutiny of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement, especially regarding deportations to countries with documented human rights violations. The case underscores migrants’ constitutional rights to due process and highlights the legal and ethical challenges surrounding forced removals to unsafe destinations without proper legal recourse. The emergency court filing demands immediate intervention to prevent further potential abuses as these deportations proceed.