A newly surfaced immigration enforcement memo reveals that United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can now deport migrants to countries other than their homeland with as little as six hours’ notice. This marks a dramatic shift from the previous standard, where ICE generally provided a minimum 24-hour notice period before conducting deportations to a third country. The policy, outlined in a memo dated July 9 and signed by acting ICE director Todd Lyons, allows for this expedited process in what are described as “urgent situations.” It is the latest indication of the Trump administration’s efforts to accelerate the deportation process for non-citizens residing in the country without legal status.
The core of the policy change lies in ICE's authority to send migrants to countries that have formally pledged not to subject them to persecution or torture, effectively bypassing further legal hearings or appeals. Under the new rule, these third-country deportations can proceed quickly, even if the migrant has never previously resided in or had connections to the destination country. Critics of the policy argue that it raises serious human rights and legal concerns, while the administration insists it helps efficiently manage immigration enforcement and remove individuals who, in their view, have exhausted legal pathways to remain.
This policy builds on a recent US Supreme Court decision in June, which cleared the way for resuming third-country deportations by lifting a lower court injunction. That injunction had previously required ICE to confirm whether migrants feared persecution in the proposed third country before deportation. With the legal hurdle removed, ICE wasted no time in executing the new powers. Shortly after the ruling, the agency deported eight individuals to South Sudan from a range of countries including Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Sudan, and Vietnam.
In addition to these deportations, reports indicate that the administration has begun reaching out to several African nations, encouraging them to receive deportees from other parts of the world. Countries such as Liberia, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, and Gabon are reportedly among those asked to accept foreign nationals as part of the expanded third-country removal policy. The move signifies a broader strategic approach by the administration to forge bilateral or informal arrangements with countries willing to cooperate with such deportation efforts.
Supporters of the policy argue that it is a necessary step to uphold immigration laws and quickly expel individuals who have criminal records or no lawful claim to remain in the United States. The administration maintains that prolonged legal processes allow too many migrants to remain in the country despite clear grounds for removal. By facilitating third-country deportations with minimal delay, they believe the immigration system becomes more effective and better able to manage its resources.
However, human rights advocates, immigration attorneys, and migrant support organizations have raised alarm bells over what they see as a dangerous precedent. They caution that the policy could result in vulnerable individuals being sent to unfamiliar countries where they face isolation, linguistic barriers, or even threats to their safety. Many of these migrants may not have access to legal counsel or the opportunity to contest their deportation once the six-hour window is initiated.
Trina Realmuto, an attorney representing a group challenging the legality of third-country deportations, criticized the new policy as lacking basic procedural protections. She argued that it “falls far short of providing the statutory and due process protections that the law requires.” Migrants previously had at least a day to consult with legal representatives, notify family, or raise concerns about the risks they might face in the third country. Under the new rules, these rights could be curtailed or eliminated entirely in the name of expediency.
Immigration experts have noted that the policy reflects a broader ideological shift under the Trump administration, which has consistently advocated for stronger border enforcement, faster deportation timelines, and fewer legal obstacles in the immigration process. The use of third-country deportations—especially to nations with limited diplomatic engagement or weak legal systems—underscores how far the government is willing to go in reimagining its immigration strategy.
While the long-term implications of this change remain to be seen, it has already drawn criticism from legal scholars, human rights groups, and immigrant advocacy organizations. The speed and secrecy with which such deportations could now occur raise questions about accountability and transparency in the immigration enforcement system. Furthermore, with geopolitical instability in many parts of the world, including some of the countries now receiving deportees, concerns about migrant safety are growing.
As the policy takes effect, courts are expected to weigh in on its legality and scope. Until then, thousands of migrants could face removal to unfamiliar lands with limited notice, uncertain legal recourse, and little assurance of protection. The change marks one of the most aggressive and controversial immigration enforcement strategies pursued under the Trump administration to date, signaling that its approach to immigration control remains firmly rooted in deterrence and rapid action.
