A federal judge has ordered the U.S. government to retain custody of several migrants who were suddenly deported to South Sudan, raising alarms about how the removals were carried out and whether they violated court protections.
The ruling came after the Department of Homeland Security deported eight individuals—only one of whom is actually from South Sudan. The others are citizens of Vietnam, Mexico, Myanmar, Laos, and Cuba. The court is now asking tough questions about how these deportations happened and whether basic legal steps were skipped in the rush to remove them.
Caught Off Guard and Shipped Out
According to court documents and advocacy groups, some of the migrants received deportation notices in English—despite not speaking the language—and were given little to no chance to talk to a lawyer or challenge being sent to a country they had no connection to.
“They didn’t even get a fair shot,” one immigration advocate said. “Some of them didn’t know where they were going until they were already on the plane.”
Judge Brian E. Murphy, who issued the order, made it clear that he’s deeply concerned about how the deportations were handled. He had previously issued an order requiring the government to give migrants a meaningful opportunity to challenge removal to third countries—but that appears to have been ignored.
South Sudan Wasn’t Ready
To make matters more complicated, South Sudan itself seems blindsided. Local officials there have publicly said they weren’t told these migrants were coming, and they don’t have any record of them arriving.
The country is still struggling with political violence and unrest following a brutal civil war. It’s currently one of the most dangerous places in the world, with the U.S. State Department warning Americans against traveling there. Human rights groups say it’s completely inappropriate to deport people—especially non-citizens—into such an unstable situation.
One U.S. official privately admitted, “It’s unclear where some of these individuals even ended up.”
Government Defends Its Move
Homeland Security officials say the deportations were justified because the migrants had committed serious crimes, including murder and child sexual abuse. A DHS spokesperson said the individuals posed “a threat to public safety and national security,” and removing them was within the law.
Still, critics argue that even people with criminal histories are entitled to due process—and that doesn’t seem to have happened in this case.
“They have rights, whether we like what they did or not,” said a lawyer for one of the migrants. “You can’t just put people on a plane to a war zone without telling them what’s going on.”
What Happens Next?
Judge Murphy hasn’t ordered the deportees to be brought back to the U.S. (yet), but he did make it clear that DHS must remain legally responsible for them. He also hinted that if it turns out the agency violated his previous orders, there could be serious consequences—including possible contempt of court.
The judge has scheduled further hearings to dig deeper into how the decisions were made and what steps the government took—or failed to take—to protect the migrants’ legal rights.
The case is drawing national attention as a test of how far the government can go in carrying out immigration enforcement, and how the courts will respond when those actions push legal boundaries.
