the federal government can deport illegal aliens to third countries—even if those countries are not their place of origin.
This decision clears a major legal hurdle, allowing the Trump Administration to resume deportation flights that had been stalled by lower court orders.
Justice Elena Kagan joined the Court’s six conservative justices in the majority, while Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
The case stems from the May 21 deportation of eight illegal aliens currently held at a U.S. military facility in Djibouti. A lower court judge had attempted to block the deportations, citing procedural concerns. However, the Supreme Court struck down that injunction.
“The May 21 remedial order cannot now be used to enforce an injunction that our stay rendered unenforceable,” the Court wrote, effectively dismissing the judge’s challenge.
Broader Legal Impact
This ruling builds on a June 23 decision, where the Court ruled against the broad use of nationwide injunctions by lower courts. That earlier ruling limited the ability of district judges to block presidential executive actions across the country.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored that opinion. Together, the two decisions mark a significant expansion of executive authority and further solidify Trump’s ability to carry out immigration enforcement with minimal judicial interference.
What Happens to the Eight Detainees?
The eight non-citizens, each with criminal convictions, were transferred to Djibouti in May. Legal activists argued that they should not be deported without a formal review of whether they faced a “reasonable fear” of torture or persecution.
Despite those arguments, the Supreme Court’s decision now paves the way for their removal.
Justice Kagan, who had previously dissented in the June ruling, explained her shift in position:
“A majority of this Court saw things differently, and I do not see how a district court can compel compliance with an order that this Court has stayed.”
Critics Slam the Decision
The National Immigration Litigation Alliance, representing the detainees, criticized the Court’s action.
“This order rewards the government for violating a preliminary injunction and bypassing due process,” the organization claimed in a statement.
However, Trump officials emphasized that all eight individuals had criminal records and posed a risk to national security.
Trump’s Immigration Agenda Gains Steam
This latest legal win gives the Trump Administration increased momentum as it expands immigration enforcement under the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” Deportation operations are expected to ramp up, both at the U.S. border and at overseas facilities.
Earlier this year, the administration established multiple offshoring programs, using U.S. military bases and cooperative agreements with partner countries to process and remove illegal migrants outside U.S. jurisdiction.
Limiting Judicial Activism
Legal experts say these two recent rulings collectively reshape the federal balance of power.
“The Supreme Court just reminded the lower courts that they don’t get to run immigration policy,” said immigration attorney and Trump legal advisor Maria Chavarria. “This puts the White House back in charge—where it belongs.”
The decisions also signal to district judges that nationwide blocks on immigration enforcement will now face higher scrutiny and a much faster path to being overturned.
Conclusion
With Thursday’s decision, President Trump’s immigration crackdown received a significant green light. As his administration accelerates deportation initiatives and expands overseas holding centers, the Supreme Court has made one thing clear: the power to enforce immigration law lies squarely with the executive branch.
