On June 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay in DHS v. D.V.D., permitting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to resume third-country removals, even amid substantial concerns over due process violations and international law compliance.
What the Case Involves
The case originated after DHS adopted a controversial internal policy to expedite removals of noncitizens to “third countries”—nations other than the individual’s country of origin or legal residence. This policy included minimal notice, limited to verbal or same-day written communication, and little to no opportunity for the affected individuals to assert claims under the U.N. Convention Against Torture (CAT).
In multiple instances, individuals were deported to countries such as South Sudan, Libya, and Guatemala—some without formal removal orders or judicial oversight, and in violation of a standing preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts.
Key Legal Protections in Question
- Statutory Requirements:
Under 8 U.S.C. §1231(b), the U.S. government must follow a hierarchical order of preferred removal destinations. Removal to a third country is only permissible after exhausting alternatives and determining that such alternatives are “impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible.” - International Obligations:
The U.S. is a signatory to the Convention Against Torture, which prohibits returning individuals to countries where they are likely to face torture. The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act codifies this obligation domestically, requiring DHS to withhold removal in such cases. - Due Process:
U.S. courts have long recognized that noncitizens in removal proceedings are entitled to procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment—including notice and a fair opportunity to be heard.
Why the Court’s Stay Matters
Despite multiple documented violations—including one instance where individuals were deported overnight after receiving notice just hours prior—the Supreme Court intervened to stay the district court’s preliminary injunction. The stay enables DHS to continue these third-country removals while the First Circuit Court of Appeals reviews the underlying case.
In a sharply worded dissent, Justice Sotomayor emphasized that the government “openly flouted two court orders” and risked returning individuals to countries with known threats of violence or torture.
Implications for Foreign Nationals
This ruling underscores the importance of remaining vigilant and seeking legal counsel if you are subject to a removal order or fear deportation to a third country. While the legal process plays out, individuals may be at heightened risk of removal without adequate notice or opportunity to assert their rights.
How Ahluwalia Law Offices Can Help
If you or your family members are under a final order of removal or fear removal to a third country, we urge you to contact our office immediately. Our attorneys can assess your eligibility for relief under CAT, reopening of proceedings, or other forms of protection available under U.S. and international law.
