Trump Administration Asks the Supreme Court, for a Third Time, to Restart Third-Country Deportations — DHS v. D.V.D., No. 26A406

The Trump administration went back to the Supreme Court on Thursday, September 24, 2026 — the third time in this same fight. At stake: whether immigration officers can put someone on a plane to a country that isn’t in their deportation paperwork, without first telling them where they’re going or giving them a chance to say “I could be tortured there.”

This isn’t a case anyone can join or file a claim in. It’s the federal government against a small group of immigrants, now shaping deportation procedure for the entire country. Here’s the case, where it stands, and the deadline that’s actually coming up.

DHS v. D.V.D. — Key Facts

Case Name	Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D.
Docket Numbers	24A1153 (earlier stage) / 26A406 (current application)
Court	U.S. Supreme Court, emergency (“shadow”) docket
Lower Courts	U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Judge Brian Murphy); U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit
Filed at SCOTUS	September 24, 2026 (government’s third emergency application)
Who’s Asking	U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, on behalf of DHS
Who’s Opposing	A group of immigrants with final removal orders, originally four plaintiffs from a March 2026 Massachusetts suit
Response Deadline	4:00 p.m. ET, Monday, September 28, 2026 (set by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson)
What DHS Wants	An immediate administrative stay, then a full stay, of Judge Murphy’s final judgment barring “third-country” removals without notice and a chance to contest
Legal Issue	Whether noncitizens facing removal to a country not named in their deportation order are entitled to notice and a meaningful opportunity to raise torture or persecution claims before removal
Law/Doctrine at Issue	Due process under the Fifth Amendment; the Convention Against Torture’s implementing regulations; jurisdictional limits under the INA on court review of removal claims
Scale	Roughly 25,000 people have been deported to third countries since the policy began, per Human Rights First
Case Status	Active — awaiting the immigrants’ response and a Supreme Court ruling
Last Updated	September 25, 2026

What’s Actually Being Argued Here?

DHS says third-country removals are, in its own words, “an essential tool to remove certain aliens, including some of the worst criminal aliens” — people whose home countries won’t take them back. Solicitor General Sauer told the justices that reinstating Judge Murphy’s order has already cancelled flights, added costs, and created diplomatic friction. His filing argues the lower courts ignored jurisdictional limits that block federal courts from second-guessing an individual’s torture or persecution claims outside a formal petition for review — and that a “countrywide assurance” from a receiving nation not to torture anyone should be enough, without a case-by-case check for each person being sent there.

The immigrants, and Judge Murphy, see it differently. Their position — upheld twice now, first in his final judgment and then by the 1st Circuit — is that sending someone to a country they’ve never lived in, with no advance notice and no chance to say “I’ll be tortured there,” raises a real due process problem. Murphy’s order requires DHS to give written notice of the destination country, a “meaningful opportunity” to raise a fear claim, and — if that claim clears a lower bar than before (“reasonable fear” instead of “more likely than not”) — at least 15 days to try to reopen the case.

How Did This Get to the Supreme Court Three Times?

This didn’t start last week. It traces back to a January 2025 executive order directing DHS to take “all appropriate actions” to remove noncitizens with outstanding deportation orders. DHS guidance that followed allowed sending people to countries not named in their case file, so long as certain steps were followed.

Four immigrants sued in Massachusetts federal court in March 2026, arguing the process gave them no real chance to raise fear of torture before removal. Judge Murphy sided with them and issued a nationwide order requiring notice and a hearing process.

The government has been back to the Supreme Court over this same underlying fight three separate times:

1. First trip: The court paused Murphy’s order on June 23, over a dissent from Justices Sotomayor, Jackson, and Kagan.
2. Second trip: One day later, the government asked the court to clarify that its pause also covered a separate dispute over deporting eight men to South Sudan. On July 3, the court agreed the pause applied “in full.”
3. Third trip (this one): After the case went back to the lower courts, Murphy issued a final judgment for the immigrants, and the 1st Circuit largely upheld it — then dissolved the hold that had let deportations continue during the appeal. That’s what brought Sauer back to the justices on September 24.

Why Should Anyone Outside This Case Care?

If you’re not facing deportation yourself, this still matters if you care about how much power the executive branch has to move people between countries with limited court oversight — a question that reaches well past immigration. It’s also a live example of how the Supreme Court’s emergency docket, sometimes called the “shadow docket,” can decide high-stakes policy fights through brief, often unsigned orders rather than full briefing and argument. That’s not a criticism of either side’s legal position — it’s just how fast and how consequential this process has become.

For anyone with a personal or family stake in immigration proceedings, the practical takeaway is this: whatever the Supreme Court decides here will likely determine, at least for now, whether people facing removal get advance notice and a hearing before being sent to a country outside their original order.

What Happens Next

Milestone	Date
Executive order directing DHS to expand removals	January 20, 2025
Massachusetts lawsuit filed (four plaintiffs)	March 2026
Judge Murphy’s preliminary order	March 2026
First SCOTUS stay granted	June 23, 2026
SCOTUS clarifies stay covers South Sudan dispute	July 3, 2026
Judge Murphy’s final judgment for immigrants	UNVERIFIED — exact date not specified in current reporting
1st Circuit largely upholds final judgment	Week of September 21, 2026
1st Circuit dissolves stay pending appeal	September 23, 2026
DHS files third emergency application at SCOTUS	September 24, 2026
Immigrants’ response due	4:00 p.m. ET, September 28, 2026
Supreme Court ruling	UNVERIFIED — no date set

Frequently Asked Questions — DHS v. D.V.D.

Is this a class action I can join?

 No. This is federal litigation between the Department of Homeland Security and a small group of immigrants with final removal orders. There’s no class to join and no way for the general public to become a party to this case.

What does “third-country removal” actually mean?

 It’s deporting someone to a country that isn’t named in their official removal order and isn’t their home country — often because their home country won’t accept them back.

Has the Supreme Court already ruled on this before?

 Yes, twice, both times temporarily pausing lower-court orders that limited third-country removals while the underlying case continued. Neither prior order was a final ruling on the merits.

What’s the deadline everyone should watch?

 The immigrants’ lawyers must respond to the government’s request by 4 p.m. ET on Monday, September 28, 2026. The Supreme Court could rule shortly after that, though there’s no set timeline.

Does this affect people who aren’t in deportation proceedings? 

Not directly, but the case will set precedent for how much notice and opportunity to contest removal DHS must give anyone facing third-country deportation going forward.

Why does the government say it needs this power?

 DHS says some countries refuse to accept their own citizens back, and that without third-country removal, certain people — including those it calls dangerous criminals — could not be deported at all.

Why do the immigrants say the current process is illegal?

 They argue being sent to a country with no ties, no notice, and no chance to raise a torture or persecution claim violates due process protections under the Fifth Amendment and the government’s obligations under the Convention Against Torture.

How many people does this actually affect?

 Human Rights First estimates roughly 25,000 people have been deported to third countries since the policy took effect, though the exact number affected by this specific ruling wasn’t specified in current filings.

Sources Used in This Article

• SCOTUSblog, “Trump administration again urges justices to allow deportations to third-party countries,” Amy Howe, Sept. 24, 2026: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/09/trump-administration-again-urges-justices-to-allow-deportations-to-third-party-countries/
• U.S. Solicitor General’s emergency application, Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., No. 26A406 (Sept. 24, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/26/26A406/425583/20260924155624768_DVD%20stay%20Sept%202026%20FILE%20corrected.pdf
• Associated Press, “Trump Administration Asks the Supreme Court to Allow Quick Third-Country Deportations,” Sept. 24, 2026: https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2026-09-24/trump-administration-asks-the-supreme-court-to-allow-quick-third-country-deportations
• The Washington Post, “Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow ‘third country’ deportations for now,” Sept. 24, 2026: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/09/24/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-allow-third-country-deportations-now/
• CBS News, “Trump administration urges Supreme Court to revive third-country deportation policy,” Sept. 24, 2026: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-supreme-court-third-country-deportation-policy/
• The Hill, “Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow third-country deportations to resume,” Sept. 24, 2026: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/6110459-trump-deportation-third-country-supreme-court/

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against SCOTUSblog’s contemporaneous case reporting, the Solicitor General’s filed emergency application in Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., No. 26A406, and matching coverage from the Associated Press, The Washington Post, CBS News, and The Hill, as of September 25, 2026. Last Updated: September 25, 2026.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws vary by state and individual circumstances differ. For advice about your specific situation, consult a qualified attorney.