The Supreme Court’s action follows a legal battle over a ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy. In April, Murphy barred the government from deporting immigrants to “third countries”—those not listed in deportation orders—without first ensuring they would not face torture. He reaffirmed that order in May, finding that the government violated it by attempting to send eight men to South Sudan, a country from which the U.S. has withdrawn non-emergency personnel and warns against travel due to armed conflict and other dangers.
Although the deportation flight was redirected to Djibouti, the men have remained in custody at a U.S. base there.
The Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court on May 27, arguing that Murphy’s ruling was disrupting foreign policy and national security. Solicitor General D. John Sauer called the judge’s procedures “judicially created” and said they were “wreaking havoc” on the third-country removal process.
Attorneys for the immigrants countered that the government could still carry out deportations—so long as it followed the legal safeguards outlined by Murphy.
After the Supreme Court issued its initial June 23 order, Murphy maintained that his May 21 ruling still stood. The administration returned to the court, seeking clarification and accusing the judge of defying the justices’ authority.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court responded with a 7-2 unsigned opinion stating that its June 23 decision stayed the April 18 injunction “in full” and rendered Murphy’s subsequent May 21 order unenforceable.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. Justice Elena Kagan, though critical of the policy, joined the majority. She acknowledged her earlier disagreement with the court’s ruling but said that, once a stay is in place, a lower court cannot enforce an order that has been suspended.
Sotomayor strongly objected, arguing that the government is trying to send the eight immigrants—originally from Cuba, Vietnam, and Laos—from Djibouti to South Sudan, potentially exposing them to torture or death. She criticized the court for intervening prematurely and for failing to justify its decisions, calling the majority’s stance “indefensible.”