News & Resources
The U.S. Department of State considers South Sudan too dangerous for almost all Americans – it warns travelers to plan for hostage situations and has evacuated all non-essential diplomats. Yet, the Trump administration has waged a massive legal effort to treat South Sudan – and other conflict-ridden countries – as “safe third countries” to receive people deported from the United States.
Lower courts had blocked such unprecedented deportations, but on June 23, 2025, the Supreme Court cleared the way. Ever since, the Trump administration has pushed ahead with its efforts, deporting people into unsafe conditions with essentially no process and less than 24 hours of notice, including eight individuals deported to South Sudan whose status is no longer known.
“[T]he Government removed six class members to South Sudan with less than 16 hours’ notice and no opportunity to be heard… Notice at 5:45 p.m. for a 9:35 a.m. deportation, provided to a detainee without access to an attorney, plainly does not “‘affor[d]’” that noncitizen with “‘a reasonable time’” to seek relief.“
– Dissent of Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson
President Trump campaigned on carrying out the “largest deportation” in U.S. history, but many countries do not accept nationals deported from the United States. In reaction, the Trump administration, at an unprecedented scale, has pursued third country removals – deporting people to countries that are not their country of origin or last habitual residence. In some cases, this means deporting people to countries – and even continents – where they have never so much as set foot. Some examples include:
- Around 350 migrants deported to Panama, including many of Asian, Middle Eastern, and African origin;
- 200 migrants deported to Costa Rica, including many of European, Asian, Middle Eastern, and African origin;
- Five migrants deported to eSwatini, all of Asian or Caribbean origin;
- Eight migrants deported to South Sudan, all but one of whom were of Asian, Caribbean, or Central American origin.
All migrants facing deportation are meant to be protected by the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, under which a country cannot remove “a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” However, not only has the Trump administration been deporting (or attempting to deport) migrants to war-torn countries like South Sudan and Libya, which have records of severe human rights abuses, but it has also not been giving those facing removal any meaningful notice to raise fears or claims.
“[T]he Government claims it may remove noncitizens in the space of 15 minutes…Such noncitizens cannot practicably file individual lawsuits to vindicate their due process rights. After all, they will not know of the need to file a claim until they are on a bus or plane out of the country. Nor will their counsel, whom the Government refuses to notify.”
– Dissent of Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson
Initially, the Trump administration purported to be abiding by its obligations under the Convention Against Torture by obtaining surface-level “assurances” from countries that no harm would come to individuals whom the United States removed there. In March 2025, DHS issued guidance stating that removing someone to a country that had not given such “assurances” would require further advanced notice – though the proposed process was still highly flawed and insufficient.
However, more recently, the Trump administration has given up even this facade of concern. An internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo from July 2025 reportedly stated that individuals can be removed within 24 hours even to a country that has offered no “assurances” of safety. The government compounds this extremely short timeframe further: in some instances, not providing any notice whatsoever, and adding further restrictions like precluding retained counsel from raising fear claims on their clients’ behalf.
“The Government has made clear in word and deed that it feels itself unconstrained by law, free to deport anyone anywhere without notice or an opportunity to be heard.”
– Dissent of Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson
U.S. law provides a legal framework for third country removals, but only in very narrow instances. The law requires that third country removals only be considered when deportations to all countries a migrant has a meaningful connection to are “impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible.” Historically, third country removals have been used infrequently; when the Biden administration increased their use, it was only of limited nationalities to Mexico – still legally problematic but different in kind from removals continents away. The scale, cruelty, and global expansion of the Trump administration’s third country removals is egregious, unprecedented, and an alarming abuse of power.
The Trump administration also continues to make deals with additional countries like Rwanda to accept third country removals. As of late June 2025, it had made deals or begun the negotiating process with 58 countries, who are incentivized to accept third country removals through the threat of potential tariffs, travel bans, and other restrictions. As the Trump administration moves to vastly expand its third country removals apparatus, we must not allow this inhumane practice – or the treatment of migrants as mere diplomatic leverage – to become normalized.
Anna MacLennan is the 2025 Policy and Communications Intern at IRAP. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Government from Harvard University.