The Trump administration has confirmed the deportation of eight men convicted of serious crimes in the United States to South Sudan — a nation beset by conflict and political instability, and one the U.S. government strongly advises Americans not to enter.
According to Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, the deportation flight touched down in South Sudan just before midnight EST on Friday. A government-issued photo showed the men — shackled at the hands and feet — inside a U.S. military aircraft under heavy guard.
None of the men are South Sudanese nationals. They are originally from Cuba, Mexico, Laos, Myanmar, Sudan, and Vietnam and had previously been convicted in the U.S. of violent crimes including murder, sexual assault, and child abuse. The deportations came after weeks of detention at a U.S. military base in Djibouti, where they had been held during a protracted legal standoff.
Unprecedented Deportation Sparks Human Rights Outcry
This deportation marks a new and controversial milestone in President Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement agenda: sending individuals to third-party nations they are not from — regardless of human rights concerns.
“This Independence Day marks another victory for the safety and security of the American people,” said McLaughlin, who emphasized the administration’s stance that immigration policy is a matter of national security. “A district judge cannot dictate the foreign policy of the United States.”
But critics say the move violates constitutional rights and basic human decency.
“These deportations are cruel, punitive, and unconstitutional,” said Trina Realmuto of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance. “The State Department warns Americans not to travel to South Sudan, yet these men were sent there without due process.”
Human rights groups fear the men could face imprisonment, torture, or worse upon arrival in a volatile region where U.S. officials themselves acknowledge severe risks. Although the Trump administration says South Sudanese authorities assured them the deportees would not face torture, their actual treatment remains uncertain.
Legal Saga Fueled by Supreme Court Intervention
The deportations followed a lengthy legal tug-of-war, culminating in two federal judges declining to halt the flights. Immigration advocates had fought to block the removals, citing a prior ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy that required detainees to receive adequate notice and interviews before being sent to a country that wasn’t their own.
Earlier this year, Judge Murphy halted a similar deportation effort involving Libya. When he caught wind in May of the administration’s plan to send the men to South Sudan, he ordered that they remain in U.S. custody and be allowed to contest the deportation. The eight men were subsequently transferred to Camp Lemonnier, a U.S. naval base in Djibouti, where officials cited unsafe conditions such as extreme heat, malaria risk, and rocket attacks.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court intervened last week at the request of the Trump administration. The Court temporarily lifted Murphy’s prior ruling and clarified that the government was not required to provide due process before deporting detainees to non-native countries. That decision cleared the path for Friday’s deportations.
In a last-ditch effort, immigration lawyers appealed to Judge Randolph Moss in Washington, D.C., who initially paused the deportation but later ruled that jurisdiction rested with Judge Murphy. Moss noted the risks to the men’s “physical safety” and questioned whether the government should be inflicting “pain and suffering” on individuals who had already served their sentences, regardless of their crimes.
Later that day, Murphy reaffirmed that the Supreme Court’s order was binding and denied the final motion to stop the deportations.
Political Win or Humanitarian Crisis?
While the Trump administration is framing the deportation as a national security success, human rights advocates say the move sets a dangerous precedent for international law and moral responsibility.
As the dust settles, the fate of the eight men remains unknown — and the legal, ethical, and political questions surrounding their removal continue to spark fierce debate.
