A federal judge appointed by President Joe Biden has ignited major controversy by issuing a ruling that appears to directly contradict a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court—raising legal and political tensions across the country.
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy blocked the deportation of eight migrants currently detained at a U.S. naval facility in Djibouti, despite a same-day ruling from the Supreme Court authorizing their expedited removal to third-party countries, such as South Sudan.
The high court had lifted Murphy’s earlier injunction, effectively greenlighting the Trump administration’s plan to relocate migrants whose home countries refuse repatriation. However, within hours, Murphy issued a new ruling, citing Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent rather than the court’s majority opinion.
Murphy’s order stated that the eight individuals do not yet have final removal orders to South Sudan and are being denied due process protections mandated by Congress and the Constitution. Attorneys for the migrants argued that deportation to South Sudan would expose them to indefinite detention and potential torture.
Critics quickly labeled Murphy’s decision as defiant and dangerous. “The district court’s ruling is a lawless act of defiance,” said Solicitor General John Sauer, accusing the judge of disrupting delicate diplomatic efforts and hindering lawful immigration enforcement. Sauer called on the high court to clarify that Murphy’s new order holds no legal weight.
The Supreme Court’s decision had come after a prolonged legal dispute over the government’s authority to deport migrants to third countries when their home nations refuse to accept them. Administration officials say the delay is forcing U.S. personnel to house high-risk individuals at an overseas military base situated near a volatile conflict zone.
On Monday night, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller appeared on Fox News, warning of significant developments in Boston—where Murphy presides. “Expect fireworks tomorrow,” he said, referencing what he described as a federal judge’s open refusal to comply with the Supreme Court’s authority.
This unexpected judicial showdown is now being closely watched, not just for its legal implications, but for how it may impact immigration policy, judicial oversight, and the separation of powers going forward.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaJE80_yHwk
