(WASHINGTON/JUBA) – The United States Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favour of continuing the deportation of several immigrants to South Sudan, a country still struggling with the aftershocks of conflict and instability. The court’s decision overturned an earlier ruling by a federal judge that had delayed the flight carrying the deportees, citing concerns for their safety.
The case involved eight men who had been placed on a deportation flight in May 2025. Despite being sent to South Sudan, a country they reportedly have no personal ties to, the court concluded that US immigration officials had the authority to deport individuals to third countries not necessarily their country of origin.
According to the latest Supreme Court order, the earlier flight—previously detoured due to the legal dispute—can now continue to South Sudan. The ruling effectively nullifies a broader order by federal Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts, who had initially allowed the immigrants to challenge removals to any country where they might face danger, including potential torture.
The eight individuals involved in the case had previously been convicted of serious crimes in the United States. However, their attorneys warned that sending them to South Sudan could expose them to grave risks, including imprisonment, torture, or death. Tensions in South Sudan remain high, and the country has continued to face threats of renewed civil conflict despite ongoing peace efforts.
Murphy, who was appointed by US President Joe Biden, had not blocked deportations to third countries entirely. Instead, he insisted that migrants must be given a fair opportunity to argue that they face serious danger—particularly torture—if sent to a country other than their homeland. The Supreme Court’s majority opinion, however, overruled that position, siding with the immigration authorities’ interpretation of deportation powers.
The Trump administration, which initiated the deportation efforts, criticised Judge Murphy’s ruling as a “lawless act of defiance.” The administration has taken a hardline stance on immigration, promising to deport millions of undocumented individuals from the United States.
Under this approach, agreements have been made with several countries—including South Sudan—to receive deportees when their countries of origin refuse to take them back or if legal delays block direct repatriation.
While the Supreme Court’s decision has been welcomed by officials enforcing immigration law, human rights organisations and legal experts have expressed concern over the implications. They argue that sending people to unstable or conflict-ridden states like South Sudan raises serious ethical and legal questions.
South Sudan, which only gained independence in 2011, has endured years of civil war, political violence,and humanitarian crises. Although peace agreements exist, sporadic violence and political unrest continue. Deporting individuals into such an environment has drawn international attention, with observers questioning the safety and legality of such transfers.
The Supreme Court’s decision now removes the final legal obstacle to the deportation flight, which is expected to land in South Sudan within days.
Immigration officials have not confirmed whether further deportations to South Sudan are scheduled in the near future.